MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

MP27-19 REZŪM WATER VAPOR THERAPY FOR LARGE VOLUME (≥80 ML) BENIGN PROSTATIC ENLARGEMENT: LARGE, MULTI-CENTER REAL-WORLD COHORT

2024· article· en· W4394802907 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roseanne Ferreira, Naeem Bhojani, Bilal Chughtai, Kevin C. Zorn, Dean Elterman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProstateHyperplasiaUrologyCohortProstatectomyProspective cohort studySurgeryInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Surgical Therapy & New Technology II (MP27)1 May 2024MP27-19 REZŪM WATER VAPOR THERAPY FOR LARGE VOLUME (≥80 ML) BENIGN PROSTATIC ENLARGEMENT: LARGE, MULTI-CENTER REAL-WORLD COHORT Roseanne Ferreira, Naeem Bhojani, Bilal Chughtai, Kevin C. Zorn, and Dean Elterman Roseanne FerreiraRoseanne Ferreira , Naeem BhojaniNaeem Bhojani , Bilal ChughtaiBilal Chughtai , Kevin C. ZornKevin C. Zorn , and Dean EltermanDean Elterman View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001009400.86696.a2.19AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Open or laser prostatectomy are the standard treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) of large volume prostates ≥80 ml. Rezūm is a minimally invasive procedure to ablate benign prostatic tissue. Herein, we report the prospective, multi-center results of the largest cohort of prostates ≥80 mL treated with Rezūm. METHODS: A prospective registry was established for Rezūm therapy in Canada (2019) at two high-volume centers. We reviewed data for patients followed between April 2019 and June 2023. All patients had baseline medical and BPH history documented along with uroflowmetry (Qmax and PVR), and validated questionnaires (IPSS, IPSS QoL, BPHII, IIEF-15, MSHQ-EjD function and bother). RESULTS: 175 patients (mean age 68.8±8.3 years) with prostate size ≥80 ml were treated with Rezūm. The median prostate volume was 105 ml (range 80-271 ml), 11.4% had prostate volume >150 ml and 79.4% had a median lobe. A prior history of urinary retention was documented in 54 patients. The procedure involved an average of 14±3.6 injections and median duration was 5 minutes (ranging from 2 to 13 minutes). Post-procedure catheterization was required for a mean duration of 14.3±7.7 days. IPSS reduced from a baseline score of 21.8 to 9.1, 9.3, 10.1 at 3, 12 and 24 months respectively. IPSS QoL score improved from a baseline of 4.5 to 1.5 at 12 months and 1.4 at 24 months. Qmax improved from a mean baseline of 7.8 ml/s up to 19.7 ml/s at 12 months. BPHII improved from a baseline of 7.3 to 2.3 at 12 months and further improving to 1.8 at 24 months. IIEF and MSHQ showed no significant change from baseline to 24 months. 11 (6.3%) patients noted retrograde/anejaculation and 8 (4.6%) patients needed retreatment at an average follow-up of 18±10.6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Rezūm therapy is a safe, effective, quick, outpatient procedure in prostate glands ≥80 ml with similar outcomes to prostates <80 mL. Source of Funding: None © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e431 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Roseanne Ferreira More articles by this author Naeem Bhojani More articles by this author Bilal Chughtai More articles by this author Kevin C. Zorn More articles by this author Dean Elterman 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Urology→Same topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research→French-language works237,207→