ArticleLasers in medical science2026
Safety and efficacy of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate within two weeks following transperineal biopsy.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transurethral anatomical enucleation of the prostate using a 1470-nm diode laser (DiLEP) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for large-volume benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective randomized controlled trial.Lasers in medical science · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of transurethral thulium laser cauterization in male patients with urethral hemangioma: a single-center retrospective case series.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia who had undergone transperineal biopsy (TPB) within the preceding two weeks. A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from patients who underwent ThuLEP at our urology center between January 2022 and May 2024. The study population was divided into two groups: the observation group, which underwent TPB within two weeks prior to ThuLEP, and the control group, which did not receive TPB before ThuLEP. The primary endpoints evaluated were enucleation efficiency and the incidence of perioperative complications. Secondary endpoints included postoperative recovery duration and changes in urinary-related functional parameters during the follow-up period. A total of 279 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 45 underwent TPB within two weeks prior to ThuLEP. The PSA level and PI-RADS score of the observation group were higher than those of the control group; while the morcellation time of the control group was shorter than that of the observation group (2.32 ± 0.53 vs. 2.69 ± 0.60 min, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of perioperative complication rates, urinary-related functional parameters, and prostate cancer detection rates. In addition, the preoperative IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and PVR of both groups were significantly improved at 3 and 12 months after ThuLEP. This study confirms that ThuLEP is a safe and effective surgical technique, which can be safely performed within two weeks following TPB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.