Is Prostate Urethral Lift Effective in Patients with Multiple Comorbidities?
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Ethical Statement
2.2. Study Design and Patients
2.3. Surgical Procedure, Follow-Up, and Outcomes
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Kim, K.W.; Kim, O.S. Super Aging in South Korea Unstoppable but Mitigatable: A Sub-National Scale Population Projection for Best Policy Planning. Spat. Demogr. 2020, 8, 155–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, T.H.; Han, D.H.; Lee, K.S. The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms in korean men aged 40 years or older: A population-based survey. Int. Neurourol. J. 2014, 18, 126–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gravas, S.; Cornu, J.; Gacci, M.; Gratzke, C.; Herrmann, T.; Mamoulakis, C.; Rieken, M.; Speakman, M.; Tikkinen, K. Management of Non-Neurogenic Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), Incl. Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO); EAU Guidelines Office: Arnhem, The Netherlands, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Lerner, L.; McVary, K.; Barry, M. Management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)/lower urinary tract symptoms: AUA guideline 2021. J. Urol 2021, 206, 806–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Verhamme, K.M.C.; Dieleman, J.P.; Bleumink, G.S.; Bosch, J.L.H.R.; Stricker, B.H.C.; Sturkenboom, M.C.J.M. Treatment Strategies, Patterns of Drug Use and Treatment Discontinuation in Men with LUTS Suggestive of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: The Triumph Project. Eur. Urol. 2003, 44, 539–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roehrborn, C.G. Current medical therapies for men with lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic hyperplasia: Achievements and limitations. Rev. Urol. 2008, 10, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Ahn, S.T.; Lee, D.H.; Jeong, H.G.; Kim, J.W.; Oh, M.M.; Park, H.S.; Moon, D.G. Treatment persistence with a fixed-dose combination of tadalafil (5 mg) and tamsulosin (0.4 mg) and reasons for early discontinuation in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and erectile dysfunction. Investig. Clin. Urol. 2020, 61, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reich, O.; Gratzke, C.; Stief, C.G. Techniques and Long-Term Results of Surgical Procedures for BPH. Eur. Urol. 2006, 49, 970–978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Michalak, J.; Tzou, D.; Funk, J. HoLEP: The gold standard for the surgical management of BPH in the 21(st) Century. Am. J. Clin. Exp. Urol. 2015, 3, 36–42. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Cleves, A.; Dimmock, P.; Hewitt, N.; Carolan-Rees, G. The TURis System for Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance. Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 2016, 14, 267–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pascoe, C.; Ow, D.; Perera, M.; Woo, H.H.; Jack, G.; Lawrentschuk, N. Optimising patient outcomes with photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP): A review. Transl. Androl. Urol. 2017, 6, S133–S141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Reich, O.; Gratzke, C.; Bachmann, A.; Seitz, M.; Schlenker, B.; Hermanek, P.; Lack, N.; Stief, C.G. Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: A prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J. Urol. 2008, 180, 246–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Miano, R.; De Nunzio, C.; Asimakopoulos, A.D.; Germani, S.; Tubaro, A. Treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia in older men. Med. Sci. Monit. 2008, 14, Ra94–Ra102. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Gratzke, C.; Barber, N.; Speakman, M.J.; Berges, R.; Wetterauer, U.; Greene, D.; Sievert, K.D.; Chapple, C.R.; Patterson, J.M.; Fahrenkrug, L. Prostatic urethral lift vs transurethral resection of the prostate: 2-year results of the BPH 6 prospective, multicentre, randomized study. BJU Int. 2017, 119, 767–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sievert, K.D.; Kunit, T. Emerging techniques in ‘truly’ minimal-invasive treatment options of benign prostatic obstruction. Curr. Opin. Urol. 2017, 27, 287–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Woo, H.H.; Chin, P.T.; McNicholas, T.A.; Gill, H.S.; Plante, M.K.; Bruskewitz, R.C.; Roehrborn, C.G. Safety and feasibility of the prostatic urethral lift: A novel, minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). BJU Int. 2011, 108, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, J.H.; Lee, K.S.; Kim, T.H. Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes of Prostatic Urethral Lift for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: An Asian Population Study. World J. Men’s Health 2020, 38, 338–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Baquero, G.A.; Rich, M.W. Perioperative care in older adults. J. Geriatr. Cardiol. 2015, 12, 465–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hakenberg, O.W.; Pinnock, C.B.; Marshall, V.R. Preoperative urodynamic and symptom evaluation of patients undergoing transurethral prostatectomy: Analysis of variables relevant for outcome. BJU Int. 2003, 91, 375–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Losco, G.; Mark, S.; Jowitt, S. Transurethral prostate resection for urinary retention: Does age affect outcome? ANZ J. Surg. 2013, 83, 243–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mmeje, C.O.; Nunez-Nateras, R.; Warner, J.N.; Humphreys, M.R. Age-stratified outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. BJU Int. 2013, 112, 982–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sener, N.C.; Zengin, K.; Ozturk, U.; Bas, O.; Ercil, H.; Ekici, M.; Evliyaoglu, Y.; Imamoglu, M.A. The impact of metabolic syndrome on the outcomes of transurethral resection of the prostate. J. Endourol. 2015, 29, 340–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, J.H.; Gill, B.A.; Wilkins, L.; Ramkumar, R.R.; Shoskes, D.A. Systemic Comorbidity Burden Using the ACTIONS Phenotype Predicts Urologic Medication Discontinuation Following Transurethral Resection of the Prostate. Urology 2019, 127, 91–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guo, R.Q.; Yu, W.; Meng, Y.S.; Zhang, K.; Xu, B.; Xiao, Y.X.; Wu, S.L.; Pan, B.N. Correlation of benign prostatic obstruction-related complications with clinical outcomes in patients after transurethral resection of the prostate. Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci. 2017, 33, 144–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Garcia, C.; Chin, P.; Rashid, P.; Woo, H.H. Prostatic urethral lift: A minimally invasive treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prostate Int. 2015, 3, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Perera, M.; Roberts, M.J.; Doi, S.A.; Bolton, D. Prostatic urethral lift improves urinary symptoms and flow while preserving sexual function for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur. Urol. 2015, 67, 704–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jones, P.; Rai, B.P.; Aboumarzouk, O.; Somani, B.K. UroLift: A new minimally-invasive treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ther. Adv. Urol. 2016, 8, 372–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tsui, J.F.; Dixon, C.M. Urolift: A new face of minimally invasive surgical technique for benign prostatic hyperplasia? Curr. Urol. Rep. 2016, 17, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rassweiler, J.; Teber, D.; Kuntz, R.; Hofmann, R. Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)--incidence, management, and prevention. Eur. Urol. 2006, 50, 969–979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Briganti, A.; Naspro, R.; Gallina, A.; Salonia, A.; Vavassori, I.; Hurle, R.; Scattoni, E.; Rigatti, P.; Montorsi, F. Impact on sexual function of holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate: Results of a prospective, 2-center, randomized trial. J. Urol. 2006, 175, 1817–1821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McVary, K.T.; Gange, S.N.; Shore, N.D.; Bolton, D.M.; Cowan, B.E.; Brown, B.T.; Te, A.E.; Chin, P.T.; Rukstalis, D.B.; Roehrborn, C.G. Treatment of LUTS secondary to BPH while preserving sexual function: Randomized controlled study of prostatic urethral lift. J. Sex. Med. 2014, 11, 279–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, M.Q.; Guo, L.P.; Zhang, G.D.; Yuan, K.; Li, K.; Duan, F.; Yan, J.Y.; Wang, Y.; Kang, H.Y.; Wang, Z.J. Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to large (>80 mL) benign prostatic hyperplasia: Results of midterm follow-up from Chinese population. BMC Urol. 2015, 15, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Roehrborn, C.G.; Gange, S.N.; Gittelman, M.C.; Goldberg, K.A.; Patel, K.; Shore, N.D.; Levin, R.M.; Rousseau, M.; Beahrs, J.R.; Kaminetsky, J.; et al. Convective Thermal Therapy: Durable 2-Year Results of Randomized Controlled and Prospective Crossover Studies for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. J. Urol. 2017, 197, 1507–1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gilling, P.; Barber, N.; Bidair, M.; Anderson, P.; Sutton, M.; Aho, T.; Kramolowsky, E.; Thomas, A.; Cowan, B.; Kaufman, R.P., Jr.; et al. Two-Year Outcomes After Aquablation Compared to TURP: Efficacy and Ejaculatory Improvements Sustained. Adv. Ther. 2019, 36, 1326–1336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Characteristic | Healthy Individual (n = 36) | High Comorbidity (n = 30) | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|
Age (years), mean ± SD | 60.7 ± 5.3 | 75.3 ± 8.1 | <0.001 |
Total prostate volume (cm3), mean ± SD | 50.6 ± 18.8 | 46.5 ± 15.4 | 0.102 |
PSA (ng/mL), mean ± SD | 2.0 ± 1.3 | 2.5 ± 2.3 | 0.257 |
IPSS-Total, mean ± SD | 21.4 ± 5.2 | 19.4 ± 5.9 | 0.143 |
QoL, mean ± SD | 4.9 ± 1.1 | 4.5 ± 1.0 | 0.209 |
Qmax (mL/s), mean ± SD | 9.8 ± 4.1 | 8.0 ± 4.6 | 0.105 |
Post void residual volume (mL), mean ± SD | 54.4 ± 82.4 | 44.7 ± 38.2 | 0.552 |
IIEF-5, mean ± SD | 15.8 ± 6.6 | 9.4 ± 6.8 | 0.001 |
MHSQ-function, mean ± SD | 11.1 ± 3.8 | 9.8 ± 3.3 | 0.246 |
MHSQ-bother, mean ± SD | 1.6 ± 1.3 | 1.4 ± 0.7 | 0.764 |
Comorbidities | |||
Diabetes, number (%) | 4 (11.1) | 20 (66.7) | <0.001 |
Cardiovascular disease, number (%) | 0 (0) | 14 (46.7) | <0.001 |
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, number (%) | 0 (0) | 16 (56.7) | <0.001 |
Catheter in place at procedure, number (%) | 2 (5.6) | 4 (13.3) | 0.399 |
Types of anesthesia | <0.001 | ||
Local, number (%) | 6 (16.7) | 30 (100) | |
General, number (%) | 30 (83.3) | 0 (0) | |
PUL implants, mean ± SD | 2.8 ± 0.8 | 2.7 ± 0.7 |
Variable | 1 Month | 3 Months | 6 Months | 12 Months | 24 Months | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Healthy Individuals | High Comorbidity | Healthy Individuals | High Comorbidity | Healthy Individuals | High Comorbidity | Healthy Individuals | High Comorbidity | Healthy Individuals | High Comorbidity | |
IPSS, n | 31 | 30 | 34 | 30 | 32 | 30 | 30 | 26 | 23 | 18 |
Baseline, mean ± SD | 22 ± 5.0 | 19.4 ± 5.9 | 21.5 ± 5.1 | 19.4 ± 5.9 | 21.7 ± 5.2 | 19.4 ± 5.9 | 22.0 ± 5.1 | 19.7 ± 6.3 | 22.5 ± 5.3 | 17.0 ± 4.5 |
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 13.4 ± 8.3 | 14.8 ± 6.9 | 12.3 ± 6.2 | 16.1 ± 8.7 | 13.8 ± 5.8 | 16.5 ± 7.6 | 14.6 ± 6.2 | 17.2 ± 7.1 | 13.9 ± 6.6 | 14.8 ± 4.7 |
Change, mean ± SD | −8.6 ± 7.1 | −4.7 ± 6.7 | −9.2 ± 6.3 | −3.3 ± 8.5 | −7.9 ± 6.6 | −2.9 ± 7.1 | −7.4 ± 6.6 | −2.6 ± 3.1 | −8.6 ± 6.1 | −2.2 ± 4.5 |
Change p-value | <0.001 * | 0.001 * | <0.001 * | 0.045 * | <0.001 * | 0.03 * | <0.001 * | 0.001 * | <0.001 * | 0.054 * |
Comparison p-value | 0.032 | 0.002 | 0.006 | 0.001 | 0.001 | |||||
QOL, n | 31 | 30 | 34 | 30 | 32 | 30 | 30 | 26 | 23 | 18 |
Baseline, mean ± SD | 5.0 ± 1.1 | 4.5 ± 1.0 | 4.9 ± 1.1 | 4.5 ± 1.0 | 4.9 ± 1.1 | 4.5 ± 1.0 | 4.9 ± 1.2 | 4.5 ± 1.0 | 4.8 ± 1.2 | 4.1 ± 0.9 |
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 3.1 ± 1.7 | 3.4 ± 1.4 | 2.5 ± 1.4 | 3.5 ± 1.7 | 2.8 ± 1.4 | 3.3 ± 1.3 | 2.9 ± 1.4 | 3.5 ± 1.3 | 3.0 ± 1.3 | 3.6 ± 0.9 |
Change, mean ± SD | −1.9 ± 1.6 | −1.1 ± 1.4 | −2.4 ± 1.4 | −1.1 ± 1.8 | −2.1 ± 1.6 | −1.2 ± 1.5 | −2.0 ± 1.4 | −1.2 ± 1.4 | −1.8 ± 1.3 | −0.6 ± 1.1 |
Change p-value | <0.001 † | 0.001 † | <0.001 † | 0.004 † | <0.001 † | 0.001 † | <0.001 † | <0.001 † | <0.001 † | 0.045 † |
Comparison p-value | 0.039 | 0.002 | 0.022 | 0.038 | 0.002 | |||||
Qmax (mL/s), n | 28 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 30 | 30 | 26 | 26 | 18 | 18 |
Baseline, mean ± SD | 9.7 ± 4.2 | 8.0 ± 4.6 | 10.1 ± 4.3 | 8.0 ± 4.6 | 10.3 ± 4.2 | 8.0 ± 4.6 | 9.1 ± 3.9 | 8.4 ± 4.8 | 10.0 ± 3.9 | 9.5 ± 5.3 |
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 14.0 ± 7.5 | 10.7 ± 6.0 | 15.9 ± 6.2 | 10.3 ± 5.2 | 14.4 ± 6.9 | 9.4 ± 5.7 | 12.8 ± 5.8 | 9.2 ± 4.7 | 13.3 ± 6.2 | 10.4 ± 4.7 |
Change, mean ± SD | 4.3 ± 5.7 | 2.7 ± 4.6 | 5.8 ± 5.0 | 2.3 ± 3.8 | 4.1 ± 5.2 | 1.4 ± 4.3 | 3.8 ± 4.1 | 0.8 ± 3.1 | 3.3 ± 4.8 | 0.9 ± 4.0 |
Change p-value | <0.001 * | 0.004 † | <0.001 * | 0.002 † | <0.001 * | 0.137 † | <0.001 * | 0.469 † | 0.009 * | 0.325 † |
Comparison p-value | 0.242 | 0.003 | 0.028 | 0.006 | 0.112 | |||||
PVR, n | 28 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 30 | 28 | 25 | 26 | 17 | 20 |
Baseline, mean ± SD | 53.6 ± 77.3 | 44.7 ± 38.2 | 46.5 ± 73.7 | 44.7 ± 38.2 | 49.3 ± 75.2 | 36.4 ± 22.6 | 58.0 ± 80.5 | 49.2 ± 39.1 | 65.9 ± 95.5 | 36.0 ± 20.6 |
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 34.8 ± 32.1 | 54.9 ± 59.7 | 30.0 ± 53.4 | 43.5 ± 38.1 | 23.0 ± 24.3 | 37.1 ± 29.7 | 36.4 ± 42.2 | 92.3 ± 160.4 | 44.7 ± 92.7 | 32.5 ± 29.8 |
Change, mean ± SD | −18.8 ± 79.1 | 10.3 ± 53.1 | −16.5 ± 59.3 | −1.2 ± 36.6 | −26.3 ± 67.1 | 0.7 ± 30.7 | −21.6 ± 67.4 | 43.1 ± 128.5 | −21.2 ± 78.7 | −3.5 ± 36.4 |
Change p-value | 0.475 † | 0.841 † | 0.217 † | 0.509 † | 0.061 † | 0.498 † | 0.286 † | 0.651 † | 0.483 † | 0.153 † |
Comparison p-value | 0.104 | 0.233 | 0.053 | 0.03 | 0.403 | |||||
IIEF-5, n | 19 | 6 | 23 | 20 | 22 | 16 | 23 | 14 | 21 | 14 |
Baseline, mean ± SD | 16.9 ± 5.8 | 16.7 ± 1.0 | 16.4 ± 6.0 | 9.4 ± 6.8 | 16.3 ± 6.2 | 11.4 ± 6.2 | 16.1 ± 6.1 | 13.0 ± 4.6 | 16.5 ± 6.1 | 13.0 ± 4.6 |
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 15.6 ± 6.9 | 16.7 ± 1.0 | 15.5 ± 6.1 | 9.8 ± 6.6 | 16.8 ± 5.6 | 11.9 ± 5.5 | 16.4 ± 6.2 | 13.3 ± 3.5 | 16.2 ± 5.7 | 13.0 ± 5.2 |
Change, mean ± SD | −1.3 ± 3.6 | 0.4 ± 2.2 | 0.5 ± 4.0 | 0.5 ± 2.6 | 0.3 ± 4.4 | 0.3 ± 2.6 | −0.2 ± 3.8 | 0.0 ± 1.8 | ||
Change p-value | 0.033 † | 1.00 † | 0.199 † | 0.497 † | 0.681 † | 0.691 † | 0.839 † | 0.874 † | 0.380 † | 0.794 † |
Comparison p-value | 0.065 | 0.985 | 0.83 | |||||||
MHSQ-function, n | 15 | 6 | 15 | 16 | 10 | 12 | 19 | 12 | ||
Baseline, mean ± SD | 10.5 ± 4.0 | 9.0 ± 1.5 | 12.1 ± 3.1 | 9.7 ± 3.3 | 12.6 ± 3.0 | 9.3 ± 3.5 | 11.2 ± 3.8 | 9.3 ± 3.5 | ||
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 9.3 ± 5.1 | 9.0 ± 1.5 | 11.1 ± 3.6 | 9.2 ± 3.3 | 10.7 ± 2.9 | 9.2 ± 3.3 | 10.9 ± 2.6 | 9.2 ± 3.0 | ||
Change, mean ± SD | −1.1 ± 3.3 | −0.6 ± 1.1 | −2.8 ± 4.1 | 0.1 ± 3.2 | −1.0 ± 4.4 | −0.2 ± 2.0 | ||||
Change p-value | 0.447 † | 0.914 † | 0.234 † | 0.058 † | 0.052 † | 0.959 † | 0.528 † | 0.776 † | ||
Comparison p-value | 0.167 | 0.081 | 0.544 | |||||||
MHSQ-bother, n | 15 | 6 | 15 | 16 | 10 | 12 | 19 | 12 | ||
Baseline, mean ± SD | 1.6 ± 1.5 | 1.7 ± 0.5 | 1.1 ± 0.9 | 1.5 ± 0.7 | 0.9 ± 0.9 | 1.5 ± 0.8 | 1.4 ± 1.3 | 1.4 ± 0.8 | ||
Follow-up, mean ± SD | 1.7 ± 1.8 | 1.7 ± 0.5 | 1.2 ± 1.3 | 1.5 ± 0.7 | 1.4 ± 1.3 | 1.8 ± 0.9 | 1.6 ± 1.3 | 1.4 ± 0.9 | ||
Change, mean ± SD | 0.1 ± 0.9 | 0.0 ± 0.5 | 0.0 ± 2.1 | 0.3 ± 0.5 | 0.1 ± 1.1 | 0.2 ± 0.4 | ||||
Change p-value | 0.829 † | 1.00 † | 0.589 † | 1.00 † | 0.301 † | 0.046 † | 0.357 † | 1.00 † | ||
Comparison p-value | 0.618 | 0.625 | 0.838 |
Adverse Event | Healthy Individuals (n = 36) | High Comorbidity (n = 30) | p-Value * |
---|---|---|---|
Dysuria, n (%) | 6 (16.7) | 4 (13.3) | 0.745 |
Hematuria, n (%) | 4 (11.1) | 5 (16.7) | 0.721 |
Prostate abscess, n (%) | 1 (2.8) | 0 | |
Treatment failure, n (%) | 3 (8.3) | 11 (36.7) | 0.007 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ahn, S.-T.; Lee, D.-H.; Cho, S.-B.; Lee, H.-S.; Han, D.-E.; Park, T.-Y.; Moon, D.-G. Is Prostate Urethral Lift Effective in Patients with Multiple Comorbidities? J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 1928. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11071928
Ahn S-T, Lee D-H, Cho S-B, Lee H-S, Han D-E, Park T-Y, Moon D-G. Is Prostate Urethral Lift Effective in Patients with Multiple Comorbidities? Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022; 11(7):1928. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11071928
Chicago/Turabian StyleAhn, Sun-Tae, Dong-Hyun Lee, Sun-Bum Cho, Hyun-Soo Lee, Da-Eun Han, Tae-Yong Park, and Du-Geon Moon. 2022. "Is Prostate Urethral Lift Effective in Patients with Multiple Comorbidities?" Journal of Clinical Medicine 11, no. 7: 1928. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/jcm11071928