MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414081452 · doi:10.1097/mou.0000000000001335

Next-gen minimally invasive surgical therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia: innovations, selection, and best practices- a review from European Association of Urology endourology

2025· review· en· W4414081452 on OpenAlexaff
Keiran J.C. Pace, Tiange Li, Dean Elterman

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Urology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate diseaseMEDLINEMinimally invasive proceduresTherapeutic approach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The expanding range of minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) reflects a growing emphasis on individualized, anatomy-driven treatment that prioritizes symptom relief, reduced morbidity, and preservation of sexual function. This review provides a timely synthesis of MISTs, highlighting innovations in technique, key anatomical considerations, and evolving strategies for patient-centered care in the modern clinical setting. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies highlight the expanding role of MISTs, such as UroLift, Rezūm, the temporary implanted nitinol device, Optilume BPH, transperineal laser ablation, and prostatic stents. Each modality shows distinct performance characteristics depending on factors such as prostate volume, intravesical prostatic protrusion, bladder neck configuration, and the presence of a median lobe. Increasing attention has also been given to preserving antegrade ejaculation, which is often a high priority for younger or sexually active patients. Concurrently, new decision aid tools are in development to support shared decision-making in concordance with patient values and treatment preferences. SUMMARY: MISTs represent a diverse and maturing set of therapeutic options. Optimizing their use requires detailed anatomical assessment and thoughtful, individualized decision-making to align treatment with patient goals, preserve function, minimize morbidity, and reflect contemporary evidence-based standards in BPH management.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in UrologySame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207