<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles.f3b1fba60ec7970c.css">

Publication:
Corrigendum to “systematic review and pooled analysis of functional and sexual outcomes of minimally invasive surgical treatments for benign prostatic obstruction”(European urology, (2026), 89, 4, (318-331), (s0302283825004920), 10.1016/J.Eururo.2025.09.004)

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Departments

Item type:Organizational Unit,

School / College / Institute

Item type:Organizational Unit,
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Upper Org Unit

Program

KU-Authors

Organization Authors

Co-Authors

Franco, A.

Ditonno, F.

Manfredi, C.

Bologna, E.

Licari, L. C.

Orecchia, L.

Agró, E. F.

Antonelli, A.

Arlandis, S.

Autorino, R.

Date

Language

eng

Type

Embargo Status

N/A

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Alternative Title

Abstract

Authors and title are correct. The authors regret an error in the reported anejaculation rate for the temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in the above article. The anejaculation rate after iTind treatment was incorrectly stated as 1% in three sections of the article. The correct value is 0%. The specific corrections are as follows:1.Abstract / Key findings (page 319): The sentence “Anejaculation rates were 5% with TPLA, 3% with Rezum, 1% with iTIND, and 0% with UroLift and Optilume” should read: “Anejaculation rates were 5% with TPLA, 3% with Rezum, and 0% with iTIND, UroLift and Optilume.”2.Under Table 2 (Page 322). For Amparore [38] reference, under anejaculation (last column), instead of “1 (1%, 0–7%)” should read “0”.3.Results, Section 3.3 iTind (page 324): The sentence “The anejaculation rate after iTind treatment was 1% (95% CI 0–0.07; I2 = NA)” should read: “No patients reported postoperative anejaculation.”4.Discussion, Section 3.8 / Definition of MIST success (page 325): The sentence “UroLift appears to be the safest technique, with an anejaculation rate of 0%. ” should be read “UroLift and iTIND appear to be the safest techniques, with anejaculation rates of 0%. Abstract / Key findings (page 319): The sentence “Anejaculation rates were 5% with TPLA, 3% with Rezum, 1% with iTIND, and 0% with UroLift and Optilume” should read: “Anejaculation rates were 5% with TPLA, 3% with Rezum, and 0% with iTIND, UroLift and Optilume.” Under Table 2 (Page 322). For Amparore [38] reference, under anejaculation (last column), instead of “1 (1%, 0–7%)” should read “0”. Results, Section 3.3 iTind (page 324): The sentence “The anejaculation rate after iTind treatment was 1% (95% CI 0–0.07; I2 = NA)” should read: “No patients reported postoperative anejaculation.” Discussion, Section 3.8 / Definition of MIST success (page 325): The sentence “UroLift appears to be the safest technique, with an anejaculation rate of 0%. ” should be read “UroLift and iTIND appear to be the safest techniques, with anejaculation rates of 0%. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. © 2026 European Association of Urology.

Source

Publisher

Elsevier

Citation

item.page.haspartof

Source

European Urology

item.page.ispartofseries

item.page.edition

DOI

10.1016/j.eururo.2026.05.003

item.page.datauri

item.page.link

Rights

N/A

Copyrights Note

Rights and licensing

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Patent

Related Goal

Google Scholar
Scholar'da Ara ↗
0
Görüntülenme
0
İndirme
Altmetric
Dimensions
PlumX Metrikleri
BIP! Indicators