The incidence of urethral stricture and bladder neck contracture with transurethral resection vs. holmium laser enucleation of prostate: A matched, dual-center study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Urethral strictures (US) and bladder neck contracture (BNC) are common, long-term complications of transurethral prostate surgery. We aimed to compare transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) regarding incidence of US or BNC and identify possible risk factors. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent TURP and HoLEP with followup data of at least one year in two separate institutions was performed. The incidence of postoperative US or BNC in both groups was compared. Bivariate and multivariate analysis of risk factors in both cohorts with US or BNC were performed. RESULTS: The study included 208 patients: 101 and 107 patients in the TURP and HoLEP arms, respectively. The two groups were matched for age and prostate size. Eight (7.92%) and five (4.72%) patients in the TURP and HoLEP arms, respectively, developed US (p=0.3423), while two (1.87%) patients in the HoLEP arm had BNC (p=0.2634). Of the eight patients with the US in the TURP arm, six (9.8%) had bipolar TURP, while two (5%) had monopolar TURP. Multivariate analysis showed that larger prostate volume (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05, 1.41, p=0.0066) and longer operative time (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.76, 1.93, p=0.0015) were associated with risk of US/BNC. CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference between TURP and HoLEP regarding incidence of US or BNC, although there is a tendency towards a higher rate of US associated with bipolar TURP. Increased prostate volume and operative time are possible risk factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".