↓ Skip to main content

A prospective randomized study comparing bipolar plasmakinetic transurethral resection of the prostate and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of Benign Prostatic…

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A prospective randomized study comparing bipolar plasmakinetic transurethral resection of the prostate and monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate for the treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: efficacy, sexual function, Quality of Life, and complications
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, February 2021
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2019.0766
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hugo Otaola-Arca, Manuel Álvarez-Ardura, Roberto Molina-Escudero, Mario I. Fernández, Álvaro Páez-Borda

Abstract

To generate high-quality data comparing the clinical efficacy and safety profile between monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) and bipolar plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PK-TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Prospective, randomized, single-blinded study conducted in a tertiary-care public institution (Dec/2014-Aug/2016). prostate of <80g in patients with drug-refractory lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), complications derived from BPH, or both. a history of pelvic surgery/radiotherapy, neurogenic bladder dysfunction or documented/suspected prostate carcinoma. Treatment efficacy evaluated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Efficacy outcomes: international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QoL) score, international index of erectile function-5 (IIEF-5), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine (PVRU) volume, and prostate volume (PV). Complications and sequelae also assessed. Comparisons performed with parametric/non-parametric tests. Out of the 100 hundred patients, 84 qualified for the analysis (45 M-TURP/39 PK-TURP). No significant differences found in baseline characteristics or operative data, except for a longer operative time in PK-TURP (MD:7.9min; 95%CI:0.13-15.74; p=0.04). No differences found in IPSS, Qmax or PVRU volume. QoL score at 12 months was higher in PK-TURP (MD:0,9points; 95%CI:0.18-1.64; p=0.01). No differences in sexual function, PV, complications or sequelae were found. This study is "rigorous" (Jadad-scale) and has a low risk of bias (Cochrane-Handbook). Based on this controlled trial, there is not significant variation in effectiveness and safety between M-TURP and PK-TURP for the treatment of BPH. The small difference in QoL between PK-TURP and M-TURP at the one-year follow-up is not perceivable by the patients and, therefore, not clinically relevant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 9%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Master 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 30 54%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 36 64%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 April 2021.
All research outputs
#14,634,268
of 25,628,260 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#284
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,336
of 533,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,628,260 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 533,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.