ReviewBJUI compass2026
A systematic review and meta-analysis on the safety and efficacy of Aquablation.
Review in BJUI compass, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This work aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Aquablation for the treatment of benign prostatic enlargement. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO CRD420261401865). A comprehensive PubMed search identified prospective studies and randomised controlled trials published up to January 2026. Studies including ≥30 patients reporting clinical outcomes of Aquablation were included. Guidelines, case reports, review articles, letters, retrospective studies with pooled data were excluded. Primary outcomes were International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum flow rate, postvoid residual and sexual function. Secondary outcomes included perioperative parameters and complications. Random-effects meta-analysis using DerSimonian-Laird was performed for outcomes reported in three or more studies. Results: Fifteen studies comprising 1580 patients were included. Mean age and prostate volume were 67.0 years and 82.1 cc, respectively. Aquablation significantly improved urinary outcomes, with a pooled IPSS reduction of -15.80 at 6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] -17.88 to -13.73; Conclusion: Aquablation provides durable and significant improvements in urinary outcomes with a favourable safety profile and low rates of sexual dysfunction, supporting its role as an effective surgical option for BPE.
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.