Safety and Efficacy of Same Day Discharge for Men Undergoing Contemporary Robotic-assisted Aquablation Prostate Surgery in an Ambulatory Surgery Center Setting—First Global Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of same-day discharge (SDD) after Aquablation specifically in an ambulatory surgery center (ASC). METHODS: A prospective cohort of men with significant BPH underwent Aquablation at a single ASC. Comprehensive preoperative assessments were conducted, including uroflowmetry, IPSS, and PVR. Aquablation was performed as morning cases by a single experienced surgeon. Following the procedure, men were assessed for immediate postoperative outcomes, including pain levels, hematuria, and voiding efficiency. Patients meeting discharge criteria were allowed to return home on the same calendar day. RESULTS: A total of 60 consecutive men with a mean prostate size of 115 mL underwent Aquablation, 59 (98%) of whom were discharged the same day. No transfusions or return to the OR occurred. The procedure demonstrated a significant improvement in urinary flow rates and a substantial reduction in IPSS scores at the 1-month post-operative period. Pain scores were found to be minimal, and the incidence of postoperative complications, including hematuria and urinary retention was low and comparable to previously published outcomes. Despite more meticulous focal cautery, no differences in erectile, ejaculatory or adverse outcomes were observed. CONCLUSION: Aquablation for BPH at an ASC appears to be a safe and effective approach. Morning procedures and attentive cautery and streamlined patient pathways seem essential for SDD. Despite electrosurgical hemostasis, ejaculatory, sexual, and post-operatively pain were not compromised.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".