ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2026
Single-port transvesical enucleation of the prostate (STEP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a comparative analysis of patients with large (80-150cc) and very large (>150cc) prostate volumes.
Article in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSingle-Port Transvesical Enucleation of the Prostate (STEP) is a minimally invasive robotic technique for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), particularly in prostates ≧ 80 cc. However, its outcomes in very large prostates (>150 cc) remain under-characterized. We compared perioperative and functional outcomes of STEP between large (LP: 80-150 cc) and very large prostates (VLP: >150 cc). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 183 patients who underwent STEP using the da Vinci Single-Port system (2019-2024). Patients were stratified into LP and VLP cohorts based on prostate volume (PV). Enucleation efficiency was defined as enucleated tissue weight divided by enucleation time (g/min). Outcomes were compared using descriptive statistics.
resultsA total of 179 patients were included (LP: 93; VLP: 86). Median PV was significantly greater in the VLP group (194 vs. 117 cc, p < 0.001). VLP patients had higher PSA (9.7 vs. 6.75 ng/mL, p = 0.002), longer enucleation (84 vs. 69 min, p = 0.002) and console times (115 vs. 98 min, p = 0.010), and improved enucleation efficiency (1.23 vs. 0.97 g/min, p = 0.025). Estimated blood loss was slightly higher in VLP (100 vs. 80 mL, p = 0.026). All procedures were completed without conversion or additional ports. Hospital stay, catheter duration, and same-day discharge rates were comparable. At 3 months, both groups had equivalent improvements in International Prostate Symptom Score (3 vs. 3, p = 0.913), quality-of-life scores (0 vs. 1, p = 0.965), and maximum flow rate (17.5 vs. 16 mL/s, p = 0.594). Complications were rare, with no readmissions and only two major postoperative events. Urinary continence was preserved in all patients, with transient incontinence occurring in 6 patients (LP: 2; VLP: 4), resolving completely by 3 months.
conclusionsSTEP is effective and scalable for prostates ≥ 80 cc, demonstrating improved enucleation efficiency in very large glands without compromising safety, recovery, or continence preservation.
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.