ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2026
A propensity score-matched comparison of medium- to long-term outcomes between plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), yet its the adoption of alternative techniques such as plasmakinetic enucleation of the prostate (PKEP). While PKEP has demonstrated favorable short-term outcomes, comparative evidence on mid- to long-term functional efficacy, safety, and the associated learning curve relative to TURP remains limited. This study aims to compare perioperative outcomes, mid-to-long-term functional efficacy, safety, and learning curves between PKEP and TURP in patients with BPH. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on BPH patients treated between January 2017 and December 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1:2 ratio and a caliper value of 0.10 was employed to balance baseline characteristics, resulting in 159 matched patients (53 in the PKEP group and 106 in the TURP group). Perioperative outcomes, along with International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL) score, maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual urine volume (PVR), and International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) scores were assessed at 3 to 24 months postoperatively. Complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo grading system, and learning curves were analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Results: The PKEP group demonstrated significantly shorter operative time, intraoperative irrigation fluid usage, postoperative bladder irrigation duration and volume, catheterization time, and hospital stay compared to the TURP group (all P<0.05). Additionally, the PKEP group experienced a significantly smaller reduction in postoperative hemoglobin levels (P=0.01). At 24 months postoperatively, the PKEP group achieved superior IPSS scores, Qmax, and IIEF-5 scores compared to the TURP group (IPSS: 6.00 Conclusions: PKEP demonstrates comparable mid-to-long-term efficacy to TURP but offers advantages in terms of reduced invasiveness, higher perioperative efficiency and safety, and a lower incidence of Clavien-Dindo II complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.