Optilume, a minimally invasive solution for BPH and urethral stricture: what we know, what we need? an EAU endourology scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Optilume and Optilume BPH, a minimally invasive drug-coated balloon (DCB) combining mechanical dilation with paclitaxel delivery, offers a novel approach for treating urethral strictures and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) respectively. This scoping review summarizes current evidence on their efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes to evaluate their role in reducing recurrence and improving patient-reported and functional outcomes. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus) until March 2025 identified 287 studies. Eligibility followed PICOS criteria, excluding non-English articles, reviews, and case reports. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane RoB 2 and MINORS tools. Data extraction focused on anatomical success, symptom improvement, complications, and retreatment rates. This review was registered at https://osf.io/vf4dw . RESULTS: After screening, 20 studies met inclusion criteria: 2 preclinical animal studies, 12 clinical studies on urethral strictures, and 6 on BPH. For urethral strictures, the ROBUST trials demonstrated 71.7% freedom from reintervention at 5 years, with sustained improvements in peak flow rate (Qmax: 5.0 to 19.9 mL/s) and IPSS (25.2 to 7.2). In BPH, the PINNACLE trial reported a 67.5% responder rate (≥ 30% IPSS improvement) at 2 years, with IPSS reduced from 23.4 to 11.0. Qmax improved from 8.9 to 19.0 mL/s, and sexual function (IIEF scores) remained stable. Safety profiles were favorable, with transient hematuria (15-39.8%) and no severe complications. Cost analyses indicated potential savings due to reduced retreatment. CONCLUSION: Optilume provides significant symptom relief for BPH and urethral strictures, with low recurrence rates and preserved sexual function. Its minimally invasive nature, combined with targeted drug delivery, positions it as a promising alternative to traditional surgeries. Further research is needed to expand indications and validate long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness across diverse populations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".