Evidence Hub

Aquablation in men with benign prostate hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

David C. Chen, Liang Qu, Howard Webb, Kirby R. Qin, Bodie Chislett, Alan Xue, Sari Safaa Khaleel, Manuel R. de Jesus Escano et al.

Current Urology, 2022

551 participants · 16 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective The aim of the study is to investigate improvements in lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) treated with prostatic Aquablation. Materials and methods We performed a literature search of clinical trials using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and retrieved published works on Aquablation for the treatment of BPH up to August 2021. Unpublished works, case reports, conference proceedings, editorial comments, and letters were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool. Raw means and mean differences were meta-analyzed to produce summary estimates for pre- versus post-International Prostate Symptom Scores, maximum flow rate, and male sexual health questionnaire value changes. An inverse-variance weighted random effects model was used. Results Seven studies were included in this review (n = 551 patients) that evaluated various urological parameters. At 3 months, the International Prostate Symptom Scores raw mean difference from baseline was −16.475 (95% confidence interval [CI], −15.264 to −17.686; p < 0.001), with improvements sustained for 12 months. Similarly, maximum flow rate improved by +1.96 (95% CI, 10.015 to 11.878; p < 0.001) from pre to 3 months postoperatively. In addition, the male sexual health questionnaire change pooled effect size was −0.55 (95% CI, −1.621 to 0.531; p = 0.321) from preintervention to postintervention at 3 months. Meta-analyses of some outcomes showed large…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 551 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free