Rezūm therapy: Outcomes of symptom relief and quality of life in benign prostatic obstruction with three-year followup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) for treating lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The objective was to assess the durability of symptom relief and sustained LUTS improvement over a three-year followup in a real-world, multicenter cohort. METHODS: A prospective registry was maintained at two high-volume international centers for men undergoing Rezūm therapy between April 2019 and October 2024. All participants had baseline clinical data recorded, including BPH history, uroflowmetry parameters (peak flow rate [Qmax] and postvoid residual [PVR]), and validated questionnaires (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS], IPSS quality of life [QoL], BPH Impact Index [BPHII], International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF-15], and Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction [MSHQ-EjD]). RESULTS: A total of 712 men with at least one year of followup were analyzed. The mean age was 67.2 years (stanadrad deviation [SD] 8.9), and the average baseline prostate volume was 74.1 cc (SD 34.4). Mean IPSS scores improved from 22 at baseline to 9.8 at 36 months. IPSS QoL scores improved from 4.5 to 1.9. Qmax increased from 8.6 ml/s at baseline to 15 ml/s at 24 months and 12.1 ml/s at 36 months. PVR decreased from 134.9 ml to 38.5 ml. There were no significant changes in IIEF or MSHQ-EjD domains. CONCLUSIONS: Rezūm WVTT provides significant, durable symptom relief and improved urinary function over three years, with preserved sexual function.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".