A multicentre single-blind randomized controlled trial comparing bipolar and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the gold standard surgical therapy for men with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Although generally considered safer, TURP experience is limited in Canada. METHODS: Forty-three patients from 5 Canadian centres were randomized to TURP with either bipolar or monopolar platforms. Patients underwent baseline determinations of American Urological Association (AUA) symptom score, peak urinary flow rate, post-void residual bladder volume and transrectal ultrasound prostate volume. Primary outcome measures were improvement in AUA symptom score, quality of life assessment and bother assessment. Secondary outcomes included procedural times, duration of catheterization, length of hospitalization, complications and the degree of thermal artifact in tissue specimens. Patients were followed for 6 months. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were treated with bipolar and 21 with monopolar TURP. Preoperative demographics were not statistically different between groups. Postoperative data collection times were equivalent in AUA symptom, quality of life, bother and sexual function assessments. No differences were observed in the procedure time (60.7 min, bipolar vs. 47.4, monopolar) or the duration of urethral catheterization (1.5 days, bipolar vs. 1.1, monopolar). More patients in the bipolar group were discharged on the same day of surgery. There were no differences in the degree of tissue thermal artifact or complication rate. CONCLUSION: This trial suggests equivalent short-term outcomes for men undergoing monopolar or bipolar TURP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".