ArticleProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2026
Early apical release versus conventional (non-early apical release) holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative urinary incontinence and functional outcomes.
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. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite proven safety, efficacy, and durability of Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), postoperative transient stress urine incontinence (SUI) was a concern for years. A technical modification of the original HoLEP, namely early apical release (EAR) has been suggested to reduce postoperative SUI. This study aimed to collate available evidence on the impact of EAR on the post HoLEP SUI and functional outcomes in comparison to conventional (non-EAR) HoLEP.
methodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was performed until February 2026. The Search focused on studies comparing EAR with conventional HoLEP. The primary outcome was the impact of each technique on SUI. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random-effects models. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3.
resultsFive studies with 2821 patients were analyzed. EAR showed a lower risk of early SUI at 4-6 weeks (RR0.47, 95%CI 0.37-0.60; I² = 0.0%). At mid-term follow-up, 3-4 months, EAR was associated with lower risk of SUI (RR 0.44, 95%CI 0.28-0.69; I² = 0%). At 6-12 months, there were no significant differences in urinary incontinence. EAR had fewer intraoperative and late postoperative complications. However, EAR showed more early postoperative complications, mainly Clavien-Dindo grade I-II. Despite this, hospital stay was similar between both groups. Functional outcomes, including IPSS, quality of life, Qmax, and PVR, were comparable between groups throughout follow-up. Lastly, Operative time, enucleation time, morcellation time, and catheter duration were also comparable.
conclusionEAR reduces early SUI while maintaining comparable functional outcomes compared to conventional HoLEP. These findings indicate EAR is an effective continence-optimizing modification during HoLEP.
Identifiers
42897208What 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.