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 urinarytract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Althoughgenerally considered safer, TURP experience is limited in Canada.Methods: Forty-three patients from 5 Canadian centres were randomizedto TURP with either bipolar or monopolar platforms.Patients underwent baseline determinations of American UrologicalAssociation (AUA) symptom score, peak urinary flow rate, postvoidresidual bladder volume and transrectal ultrasound prostatevolume. Primary outcome measures were improvement in AUAsymptom score, quality of life assessment and bother assessment.Secondary outcomes included procedural times, duration of catheterization,length of hospitalization, complications and the degreeof thermal artifact in tissue specimens. Patients were followed for6 months.Results: Twenty-two patients were treated with bipolar and 21 withmonopolar TURP. Preoperative demographics were not statisticallydifferent between groups. Postoperative data collection times wereequivalent in AUA symptom, quality of life, bother and sexualfunction assessments. No differences were observed in the proceduretime (60.7 min, bipolar vs. 47.4, monopolar) or the durationof urethral catheterization (1.5 days, bipolar vs. 1.1, monopolar).More patients in the bipolar group were discharged on the sameday of surgery. There were no differences in the degree of tissuethermal artifact or complication rate.Conclusion: This trial suggests equivalent short-term outcomes formen 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".