Holmium Laser Ablation of the Prostate Versus Photoselective Vaporization of Prostate 60 cc or Less: Short-Term Results of a Prospective Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We report on the first randomized trial to our knowledge comparing holmium laser ablation and photoselective vaporization of the prostate in patients with a small to moderate size prostate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2005 and April 2007, 109 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate size 60 cc or smaller were randomized to photoselective vaporization of the prostate (52) or holmium laser ablation of the prostate (57). All patients were evaluated by preoperative and postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score, peak flow rate and post-void residual urine volume, measurement of prostate specific antigen and transrectal ultrasound prostate volume. Followup evaluations were performed during visits at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Mean +/- SD preoperative prostate volume was 33.1 +/- 14.5 and 37.3 +/- 13.6 cc in the holmium laser ablation group and the photoselective vaporization group, respectively. Holmium laser ablation of the prostate required more operating time than photoselective vaporization (69.8 vs 55.5 minutes, p = 0.008). In the holmium laser ablation group the International Prostate Symptom Score improved from 20 +/- 6.8 to 6.2 +/- 3.9 and peak urinary flow rate increased from 6.7 +/- 3.9 to 17.2 +/- 8 ml per second. In the photoselective vaporization group the International Prostate Symptom Score improved from 18.4 +/- 6.6 to 8.2 +/- 6.2 and peak urinary flow rate increased from 6.4 +/- 3.9 to 18.4 +/- 8.4 ml per second. Urethral stricture rates were 1.7% vs 5.7%, bladder neck contractures were 3.5% vs 7.7% and revaporization rates were 3.5% vs 1.9% in the holmium laser ablation and photoselective vaporization groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Holmium laser ablation and photoselective vaporization of the prostate are safe and effective in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia with a small to moderate size prostate. Both procedures are easy to learn but holmium laser ablation of the prostate requires a longer operating time.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".