MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2193672772 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.3066

Changing patients’ profile presenting for surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia over the past 16 years: A single-centre perspective

2015· article· en· W2193672772 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 University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeHyperplasiaProstateQuality of life (healthcare)UrologySurgeryInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the change of patients' profile presenting for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) over 16 years and its impact on surgical outcomes over this time. METHODS: We reviewed a prospectively maintained database of patients treated with laser for symptomatic BPH since March 1998. Patients were divided into 3 consecutive time-based groups: Group 1 for patients who underwent surgery before April 2004; Group 2, between April 2004 and March 2009; and for Group 3 from April 2009 to August 2014. We reviewed demographic and preoperative data, including prostate volume; international prostate symptoms score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), and peak flow rate (Qmax). We also recorded any perioperative and long-term complications. RESULTS: A total of 1835 patients were included in our study, including 542 (29.5%) in Group 1, 614 (33.5%) in Group 2, and 679 (37%) in Group 3. Preoperative prostate volume was positively correlated with age at surgery (r = 0.62, p < 0.001), total energy used (r = 0.47, p < 0.001), and total operative time (r = 0.47, p < 0.001). Patients in Group 3 were significantly older (75.28 ± 8.47 in Group 3 vs. 71.11 ± 8.9 in Group 2 vs. 65.3 ± 9.04 years in Group 1, p <0.001), were more coagulopathic (18.7% Group 3 vs. 12.3% Group 2 vs. 5.9% Group 1, p < 0.001), and had significantly larger prostates (87.96 ± 49.80 in Group 3 vs. 78.44 ± 50.84 in Group 2 vs. 74.50 ± 46.53 Group 1, p < 0.001). Preoperative prostatic medications significantly increased over time (72.6% in Group 1 vs. 85.5% in Group 2, vs. 87.4% Group 3, p < 0.001). IPSS, QoL and Qmax were significantly abnormal in patients in Group 3 (p < 0.001). After a mean follow-up of 3 years, the number of patients who did not require reoperation progressively increased (94.1% Group 1 vs. 96.1% Group 2 vs. 98.3% Group 3). Age (>72 years), prostate volume (>80 cc), operative time (>95 minutes), and preoperative PSA (>6 ng/dL) were significantly associated with postoperative urinary incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting for surgery due to symptomatic BPH over the last 16 years were significantly older, more morbid, and had larger prostates and more abnormal voiding parameters. Over time, patients used prostatic medications more frequently. Despite the changes in patient profiles, perioperative safety and complication rates between groups were comparable, likely due to advancements in laser technology and techniques. Age (>72 years), prostate volume (>80 cc), operative time (>95 minutes), and preoperative PSA (>6 ng/dL) were significantly associated with reversible postoperative urinary incontinence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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