MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390414478 · doi:10.1016/j.euf.2023.12.001

Will Aquablation Be the New Benchmark for Robotic Minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia?

2023· review· en· W4390414478 on OpenAlexaff
Carlotta Nedbal, Daniele Castellani, Virgilio De Stefano, Carlo Giulioni, Rossella Nicoletti, Giacomo Maria Pirola, Jeremy Yuen‐Chun Teoh, Dean Elterman, Bhaskar Somani, Vineet Gauhar

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Urology Focus · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnucleationSexual functionSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Aquablation is included in the European Association Urology guidelines as an alternative surgical technique for prostate resection. The evidence summary states that it is subjectively and objectively as effective as transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and enucleation, but concerns remain regarding postoperative bleeding. Our aim was to provide an evidence-based overview of the trials, triumphs, and technical challenges of Aquablation. METHODS: A literature search in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases was performed to identify clinical prospective and retrospective studies and reviews on Aquablation. A total of 54 reports were included. A narrative review of current evidence and an overview of the surgical technique are provided. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Aquablation demonstrates excellent short- and long-term functional outcomes, with a good safety profile comparable to that of TURP. The procedure is efficient and safe, even for very large prostates, with sustained improvements in functional outcomes well maintained up to 5 yr. The unique ability to conduct robotically controlled precise ablation of enlarged tissue while maintaining the sphincter makes Aquablation a very good ejaculation-sparing BPH treatment option. Initial issues with hemostasis have been successfully overcome with the use of gentle bladder-neck cautery after the procedure, allowing for early catheter removal. The above features make Aquablation an attractive minimally invasive technique and show that it is noninferior to holmium laser enucleation. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Aquablation is a valid alternative to standard resection techniques, showing excellent long-term functional outcomes, good preservation of sexual function, a good safety profile, and good compliance for all prostate sizes and patient ages. Aquablation is still performed in high-volume centers, but the results can easily be emulated in other centers worldwide. ADVANCING PRACTICE: Our review indicates that if Aquablation outcomes are emulated globally, this technique could easily become a new benchmark in robotic treatment for BPH. PATIENT SUMMARY: Aquablation is a safe and effective surgical technique for treatment for benign enlargement of the prostate, with excellent medium-term outcomes. Although long-term studies are needed, the results are promising and challenge the current surgical and laser techniques used to reduce the size of the prostate gland.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Urology FocusSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207