MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414159247 · doi:10.1016/j.cont.2025.101928

4 - Two-Year Efficacy and Safety of Rezūm Water Vapor Thermal Therapy in Large Prostates (≥80 mL)

2025· article· en· W4414159247 on OpenAlexaff
Mohannad Bitar, Déborah Jakubowicz, Roseanne Ferreira, Naeem Bhojani, Bilal Chughtai, Kevin C. Zorn, Luca Cindolo, G. Ferarri, Dean Elterman

Bibliographic record

VenueContinence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRadiation Effects and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalBP (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary retentionProstateAdverse effectInternational Prostate Symptom ScoreCohortUrinary flowUrinary system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While initial guidelines recommended Rezūm for prostates less than 80 mL, recent studies have demonstrated its efficacy and safety in larger prostates. Water Vapor Thermal Therapy (WVTT), Rezūm, is a minimally invasive therapy that uses water vapor to ablate benign prostatic tissue. This study aims to present the prospective, multi-center outcomes of the largest cohort of prostates ≥80 mL treated with Rezūm. This study involved a prospective, Rezum registry which collated information from two high-volume centers between April 2019 and August 2024. Baseline medical histories, uroflowmetry (Qmax, PVR), and validated questionnaires (IPSS, IPSS QoL, BPHII, IIEF-15, MSHQ-EjD) were recorded. The main outcomes assessed included symptom scores, functional improvement, and safety at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months. A total of 259 patients with a prostate volume ≥80 mL were treated with Rezūm. The median prostate volume was 105 mL (interquartile range 91–122.5 mL), with 207 patients (81.2%) exhibiting a median lobe. A history of urinary retention was noted in 86 patients (33.6%). On average, 13.2 injections (±3.8) were administered per procedure, which lasted an average of 6.9 minutes (±10.1). The IPSS improved from 21.8 (n=212) at baseline to 9.1 at 6 months (n=131), 6.6 at 12 months (n=107), and 5.7 at 24 months (n=68). At baseline, the maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) was 8.2 mL/s (n=198), increasing to 14.6 mL/s at 6 months (n=45), 14.1 mL/s at 12 months (n=46), and 14.9 mL/s at 24 months (n=33). Post-void residual (PVR) volume at baseline was 132.5 mL (n=196), decreasing to 72 mL at 6 months (n=42), 60 mL at 12 months (n=93), and 90 mL at 24 months (n=38). The IPSS quality of life (IPSS QoL) score decreased from 4.5 (n=212) at baseline to 1.4 at 6 months (n=131), 1.65 at 12 months (n=107), and 1.1 at 24 months (n=68). The BPHII decreased from 7.5 at baseline (n=171) to 3.3 at 6 months (n=86), 2.9 at 12 months (n=65), and 2.3 at 24 months (n=35). There was no significant difference noted in sexual function as measured by IIEF and MSHQ. Rezūm water vapor therapy appears to be both effective and well-tolerated in men with significantly enlarged prostates (≥80 mL), including those with challenging anatomy such as a median lobe and those with a history of urinary retention. Symptom improvement was both rapid and sustained over time. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) improved from a baseline of 21.8 to 5.7 at 24 months. Maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) also improved significantly, rising from 8.2 mL/s at baseline to 14.9 mL/s at 24 months. Similarly, post-void residual volume (PVR) decreased from 132.5 mL at baseline to 90 mL at 24 months. Quality of life, as assessed by the IPSS QoL score, also improved dramatically The BPH Impact Index (BPHII) followed a similar trend, decreasing from 7.5 to 2.3 by 24 months. Importantly, sexual function was preserved, with no significant changes observed in IIEF or MSHQ scores. These findings suggest that Rezūm is a promising minimally invasive treatment option even for patients with large prostates and complex anatomy, offering durable symptom relief without compromising sexual health. Significant improvements were observed in urinary symptoms and quality of life, with minimal impact on sexual function. Funding no funding Clinical Trial No Subjects Human Helsinki Yes Informed Consent Yes

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContinenceSame topicRadiation Effects and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207