PD45-01 SHORT-TERM POSTOPERATIVE FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES OF REZŪM VS. GREENLIGHT PVP 180W XPS: A PROPENSITY MATCH SCORE STUDY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022PD45-01 SHORT-TERM POSTOPERATIVE FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES OF REZŪM VS. GREENLIGHT PVP 180W XPS: A PROPENSITY MATCH SCORE STUDY Iman Sadri, David-Dan Nguyen, Adel Arezki, Naeem Bhojani, Bilal Chughtai, Dean Elterman, and Kevin C. Zorn Iman SadriIman Sadri More articles by this author , David-Dan NguyenDavid-Dan Nguyen More articles by this author , Adel ArezkiAdel Arezki More articles by this author , Naeem BhojaniNaeem Bhojani More articles by this author , Bilal ChughtaiBilal Chughtai More articles by this author , Dean EltermanDean Elterman More articles by this author , and Kevin C. ZornKevin C. Zorn More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002613.01AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Rezūm steam vapor therapy has recently gained popularity as a new minimally invasive surgical technique for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. The currently available literature on Rezūm has been promising, showing good lower urinary tract symptom relief outcomes and favorable sexual outcomes. In this multicenter study, we sought to compare the postoperative functional outcomes of Rezūm against a similar cohort of patients undergoing 180W XPS GreenLight PVP. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Global GreenLight Group database which includes 8 high-volume, experienced surgeons, from a total of 7 international centers, as well as data from the Canadian Rezūm Database. Patients with previous BPH surgery were excluded. Six-month changes in IPSS, Qmax, and post-void residual (PVR) were compared between Greenlight and Rezum using regression models with inverse propensity treatment weighting adjusting for age and prostate size. RESULTS: The Greenlight PVP and Rezūm groups have significant baseline differences in age and Qmax. At 6-month follow-up, Rezūm demonstrated a PVR of 105ml compared to 30ml (p<0.01) and an IPSS score of 9.5 compared to 6.6 (p<0.01) in the Greenlight group. Most notably, compared to Rezūm, regression models demonstrate that Greenlight PVP boasts statistically significant advantages in IPSS change from baseline [4.4 95%CI: 3.0-5.9, p<0.01], Qmax change from baseline [9.3ml/s 95%CI: 5.8-12.7, p<0.01], and PVR decrease from baseline [157ml 95%CI: 97-219, p<0.01] at 6-month follow up, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Rezūm and Greenlight both demonstrated significant IPSS LUTS improvements as well as postoperative functional parameters when compared to baseline. The significant differences in postoperative outcomes between the observed technologies relates to the degree of tissue ablation with the trade off of reduced side effects, sexual dysfunction, procedure time, length of stay and cost. Such details should be discussed and evaluated during patient consultation and BPH procedure counselling. Source of Funding: none © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e782 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Iman Sadri More articles by this author David-Dan Nguyen More articles by this author Adel Arezki More articles by this author Naeem Bhojani More articles by this author Bilal Chughtai More articles by this author Dean Elterman More articles by this author Kevin C. Zorn More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».