Holmium Laser Xpeeda Vaporization <i>vs</i> GreenLight XPS Vaporization of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: 1-Year Results from a Randomized Controlled Clinical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction and Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of Holmium Laser Xpeeda Vaporization and GreenLight XPS Vaporization of the prostate in patients with prostate size ≤80 g. Methods: Ninety-two men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate size ≤80 g scheduled for laser prostatectomy were included in this prospective randomized trial. Outcome measures were collected and compared, including International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), flow rate, postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), International Index of Erectile Dysfunction (IIEF)-15, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), transrectal ultrasound prostate volume, and catheterization time. Perioperative complications were also recorded. Patients were offered a trial of void (TOV) 3 hours after their procedures. All patients were followed-up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: There were no significant differences in preoperative baseline data between the two surgical groups. Operative parameters and postoperative outcomes were comparable. Effective same-day TOV was noted in 73.1% and 72.7% of the Xpeeda and GreenLight XPS patients, respectively ( p = 0.98). All patients were discharged home within 24 hours of their surgeries. The laser energy and postoperative complications were significantly lower in the Xpeeda group ( p = 0.002 and p = 0.026, respectively). At 3 months, the PSA levels significantly dropped in both groups ( p = 0.002 and p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in functional and sexual outcomes between the two groups at 12 months. Conclusions: Holmium Laser Xpeeda Vaporization and GreenLight XPS Vaporization are safe and effective in the treatment of BPH. Same-day discharge with early TOV is a feasible option. Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT04386941.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".