Comparison of outpatient versus inpatient transurethral prostate resection for benign prostatic hyperplasia: Comparative, prospective bi-center study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We compare the symptomatic relief with urodynamic parameter change and operative safety of the outpatient transurethral resection in saline (TURIS-V) technique with inpatient transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: This prospective cohort comparison study enrolled patients who needed BPH surgery. Between January 2010 and June 2011, outpatient TURIS-V was performed at 1 centre and the results of the treatment were compared with inpatient TURP performed at a separate hospital. Preoperative characteristics, including prostate volume, were similar in both groups. Perioperative data and any treatment complications were recorded. The analysis compared postoperative outcomes, including a 6-month postoperative International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), a quality of life (QoL) evaluation and a record of any changes in uroflowmetry findings, between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In the TURIS-V patient group, 75 patients agreed to be in the study. Of these, 69 ultimately complete the study. In the TURP group, 76 patients agreed and 71 of these completed the study. Both study groups were well-matched for age, IPSS, QoL and uroflowmetry findings. The TURIS-V group experienced both shorter operation times (54.6 vs. 74.8 minutes) and shorter catheterization times (2.2 vs. 4.2 days) when compared to the TURP group. There were comparable improvements in the 6-month postoperative IPSS, QoL, and uroflowmetry findings between the 2 groups. There were also equally low incidence rates of procedural complications. CONCLUSIONS: Both TURIS-V and TURP relieve lower urinary tract symptoms in a similar way, with great efficacy and safety. Overall, TURIS-V had shorter operative and catheterization times compared to TURP. Notwithstanding the paper's limitations (non- randomized cohort comparison with possible selection or surgeon bias and small heterogeneous sample size), TURIS-V can be performed safely even in an outpatient setting.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".