Short term outcomes of GreenLight vapor incision technique (VIT) of the prostate: comparison of outcomes to standard GreenLight 120W HPS vaporization in prostate volumes greater than 80 cc.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate a hybrid technique involving GreenLight 120W HPS vapor incision tissue removal in prostate glands > 80 cc. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Vapor incision technique (VIT) was performed in 25 consecutive men with a prostate > 80 cc by a single surgeon from May 2010 until September 2010. VIT involved adenoma incisions at 5 and 7-o'clock positions followed by 3, 9 and 12 o'clock down to the surgical capsule. Side-fire vaporization along the capsule excised transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) like tissue strips for later retrieval. Functional evaluations were performed at 1 and 3 months. Outcomes and complications were compared retrospectively to baseline and a size matched- cohort of 25 men who previously underwent standard vaporization-only photoselective vaporization prostatectomy (PVP). RESULTS: The VIT and control subgroups were comparable. Mean laser time, operative time and energy usage were reduced in the VIT group compared to controls (35 min versus 48 min; 63 min versus 80 min; and 227 k versus 325 kJ respectively; all p < 0.05). At 3 months the VIT subgroup demonstrated improved Qmax and post void residual (PVR) (197% versus 173%, 88% versus 72%; all p < 0.05) compared to control. VIT showed a 68% reduction in mean preoperative PSA at 3 months compared to 50% for the control group (p<0.01). Hospital stay, catheterization time and complication rates were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Our data demonstrates that VIT provides superior short term outcomes to standard HPS-PVP in men with prostate volumes > 80 cc. VIT appears to be more time-efficient, consumes less energy and obtains tissue for pathological evaluation. Further follow up is required to assess the durability of GreenLight HPS-VIT to PVP vaporization-only for large prostate glands.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".