PD41-02 12-MONTH OUTCOMES FROM THE FIRST NORTH AMERICAN STUDY OF THE ZENFLOW SPRING SYSTEM FOR THE TREATMENT OF BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA (BPH)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023PD41-02 12-MONTH OUTCOMES FROM THE FIRST NORTH AMERICAN STUDY OF THE ZENFLOW SPRING SYSTEM FOR THE TREATMENT OF BENIGN PROSTATIC HYPERPLASIA (BPH) Dean Elterman, Edward D. Matsumoto, and Kevin C. Zorn Dean EltermanDean Elterman More articles by this author , Edward D. MatsumotoEdward D. Matsumoto More articles by this author , and Kevin C. ZornKevin C. Zorn More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003346.02AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The ZEST-CAN study is a prospective single-arm study evaluating the Zenflow Spring System for BPH. The Zenflow Spring System is a novel minimally invasive surgical therapy (MIST) that delivers an appropriately sized nitinol stent-like device into the prostatic urethra displacing the lateral lobes for improved urinary flow. METHODS: Ten (10) subjects received the device at 3 centers in Canada. Symptom improvement was measured utilizing the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and IPSS-QOL, and functional improvement was measured by peak urinary flow rate (Qmax). Erectile and ejaculatory function were evaluated utilizing validated questionnaires. The clinical events committee independently adjudicated any adverse event. RESULTS: Subjects treated with the Zenflow Spring showed a significant reduction in IPSS from baseline to 12 months (21.2 vs 11.4, p<0.01), representing a 47% reduction in IPSS. IPSS QOL significantly improved from baseline to 12 months (5.4 vs 2.4, p<0.010, representing a 56% improvement. Qmax improved from 9.7 mL/sec at baseline to 14.0 mL/sec after treatment (p<0.05) representing a 45% improvement. There were no changes in sexual or ejaculatory function as assessed by the validated questionnaires. The responder rate at 12 months calculated as those with 30% improvement in IPSS was 70%. (7/10 subjects). Adverse events post procedure were typically mild and transient and common to events reported in similar procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The Zenflow Spring System resulted in immediate and significant symptomatic improvements from 3 through 12 months. Subjects experienced improvements in symptoms, quality of life, maximum flow rate without any sexual dysfunction through 12 months of follow up. These results are currently being validated through a large, multiple centers, prospective randomized study in the United States and Canada. Source of Funding: Zenflow Inc © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e1058 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Dean Elterman More articles by this author Edward D. Matsumoto More articles by this author Kevin C. Zorn More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".