MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1918791870 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.2735

Holmium laser transurethral incision of the prostate: Can prostate size predict the long-term outcome?

2015· article· en· W1918791870 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mohamed A. Elkoushy, Ahmed M. Elshal, Mostafa Elhilali

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstateMedicineUrologyTerm (time)Outcome (game theory)Internal medicineMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: We determine the impact of prostate size on the long-term outcome of holmium laser transurethral incision of the prostate (Ho-TUIP) for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) secondary to benign prostate enlargement (BPE). METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed for patients undergoing Ho-TUIP by a single surgeon for patients presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to BOO. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: Group 1 included patients with prostate ≤30 cc and Group 2 included patients with prostate >30 cc. Demographic, operative and follow-up data were recorded and analyzed. In addition, intraoperative and long-term adverse events were included. RESULTS: In total, 82 patients underwent surgery between March 1998 and March 2013, including 9 (11%) reoperated patients. Only prostate size independently predicted reoperation after Ho-TUIP (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.12 [2.92-9.14], p = 0.01). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis showed an optimal cutoff value of prostate volume of 29 cc to characterize long-term reoperation after TUIP, with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.96, sensitivity of 89.7 and specificity of 88.9. Group 1 included 51 patients and Group 2 included 31 patients. The international prostate symptoms score (IPSS) and peak flow rate (Qmax) significantly improved in both groups at different follow-up points. At the 12-month follow-up, the percent change in IPSS and Qmax were comparable between both groups. However, after 12 months, the degree of improvement in all voiding parameters was significantly higher in Group 1 (p < 0.001 at all points of follow-up). After a median follow-up of 5.3 years (range: 1-13), both groups had comparable early and late adverse events with significantly higher reoperation rate in Group 2 (3.9% vs. 22.6%, p = 0.02). Overall retrograde ejaculation was detected in 25.6% of sexually active men and it was comparable between both groups (23.5% vs. 29%, p = 0.61). On multivariable analysis, patients with prostate volume >30 cc were associated with significantly higher reoperation for BOO (aOR 95% CI 5.72 [2.83-8.14], p = 0.02), significantly higher IPSS (aOR 1.72), higher quality of life index (aOR 1.72) and lower Qmax (aOR 0.28). CONCLUSION: Ho-TUIP is a durable, safe and efficient treatment of BOO secondary to a small-sized prostate. The long-term outcome could be improved and the re-operation rate could be minimized with appropriate selection of cases, with prostate glands no bigger than 30 cc.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207