ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
The impact of prostate size on outcomes of aquablation: a prospective study.
Article in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comments on "Broad Applicability Is Not Size Independence: Interpreting Aquablation Outcomes Across Prostate Volumes".World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Reconsidering the evidence for size-independent outcomes after Aquablation.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor: The impact of prostate size on outcomes of aquablation-a prospective study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate whether prostate size influences perioperative, urinary, and sexual outcomes following Aquablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), by comparing men with prostates < 80 cc and ≥ 80 cc treated within a prospective real-world cohort.
methodsThis prospective, single-center cohort study included consecutive men undergoing Aquablation between 2023 and 2025. Patients were stratified by prostate volume (< 80 cc vs. ≥80 cc). Baseline characteristics, perioperative parameters, and functional outcomes were assessed using validated instruments, including IPSS, IPSS-QoL, irritative subscore, ICIQ-SF, IIEF-EF, MSHQ-EjD, and MSHQ-bother, at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
resultsA total of 628 men were included (324 with prostates < 80 cc and 304 with prostates ≥ 80 cc). Men with larger prostates had higher rates of preoperative catheter dependence (34% vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001). Operative time (40.6 ± 14.1 vs. 36.2 ± 12.6 min, p = 0.001) and hospitalization duration (2.5 ± 1.5 vs. 2.09 ± 0.8 days, p < 0.001) were longer in the ≥ 80 cc group. Both cohorts demonstrated marked and durable improvement in urinary symptoms, with mean IPSS improving from 24.5 to 6.7 in the < 80 cc group and from 24.9 to 6.0 in the ≥ 80 cc group at 24 months. Irritative symptom scores improved from 10.3 to 3.5 and from 10.5 to 2.1, respectively (p < 0.001). Sexual outcomes remained stable across prostate sizes, with preserved erectile function and low ejaculatory bother scores. High-grade complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) were uncommon and comparable between groups (2.7% vs. 4.3%), while reoperation rates remained low (3.1% vs. 3.9%).
conclusionAquablation provides durable symptom relief with preservation of sexual function across a broad range of prostate volumes, supporting its role as a size-independent surgical treatment option for BPH.
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.