Complex Buccal Graft Urethroplasty Combined With HoLEP in the Setting of Concomitant Urethral Stricture Disease and Severe Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Urethral strictures and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are 2 common causes of urinary obstruction and urinary emptying symptoms. While urethroplasty and endoscopic management of BPH have been extensively discussed in the literature when performed on their own, a case of simultaneous urethroplasty and endoscopic management of BPH has not been previously described in the literature. Case Description: We present the case of a 75-year-old man with significant BPH and concomitant bulbar obliterative urethral stricture. After discussion of treatment options with the patient, we elected to perform both holmium LASER enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) of a 200cc prostate and buccal graft urethroplasty during the same surgery. The HoLEP was performed through a dorsal urethrotomy in anticipation of urethroplasty. Nontransecting anastomotic repair was then combined with the buccal graft urethroplasty. The patient did not have any acute postoperative complications and had no recurrence. He reported improvements in outcome questionnaire scores and uroflow parameters at the 12-month follow-up. Conclusions: This case presentation is the first to report on simultaneous complex urethroplasty and endoscopic management of BPH, specifically HoLEP. It shows that this approach can lead to positive urinary outcomes without added complications and with lasting outcomes, thereby allowing the use of a combined surgical approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".