Rezūm Therapy in Very Elderly Men With <scp>BPH</scp> : Two‐Year Outcomes From a Multicenter Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy is a minimally invasive surgical option with demonstrated efficacy and safety. However, real-world evidence on 2-year outcomes in the population aged above 80 years remains limited. METHODS: A prospective registry was created as part of the International Rezūm Registry database at two high-volume centers. Data were reviewed from patients monitored between April 2019 and August 2024. Men aged ≥ 80 years who underwent Rezūm therapy were included. Baseline and follow-up assessments at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months included International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS Quality of Life (QoL) subscore, peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), and post-void residual volume (PVR). Safety outcomes and adverse events were also recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (mean age 84.4 ± 4.4 years) were included, with a mean prostate volume of 80.1 ± 42.1 cc. The mean IPSS decreased from 19.8 ± 7.4 at baseline to 12.4 ± 7.9 at 24 months. The IPSS quality of life (QoL) score declined from 4.2 ± 1.8 at baseline to 2.6 ± 1.5 at the corresponding follow-up interval. Qmax improved from 8.5 ± 5.8 mL/s at baseline to 15.0 ± 4.0 mL/s at 24 months, respectively. PVR was reduced from 115.5 ± 93.7 mL at baseline to 42.8 ± 29.2 mL over the same period. However, neither Qmax nor PVR demonstrated a statistically significant change at any time point. Adverse events were infrequent, with urinary tract infections (8.6%), epididymitis (5.2%), and acute urinary retention (3.4%). Only one patient required hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Rezūm water vapor thermal therapy is a safe and effective treatment for BPH in patients over 80 years of age. It results in durable improvements in urinary symptoms and function with a low rate of complications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".