MP01-19 GOOGLE SEARCH TRENDS AND A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF ENDOSCOPIC SIZE INDEPENDENT BPH SURGERIES

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyBenign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Surgical Therapy & New Technology I (MP01)1 Sep 2021MP01-19 GOOGLE SEARCH TRENDS AND A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF ENDOSCOPIC SIZE INDEPENDENT BPH SURGERIES Peace Orji, Henry Wright, Rebecca Campbell, William Jevnikar, Bradley Gill, and Smita De Peace OrjiPeace Orji More articles by this author , Henry WrightHenry Wright More articles by this author , Rebecca CampbellRebecca Campbell More articles by this author , William JevnikarWilliam Jevnikar More articles by this author , Bradley GillBradley Gill More articles by this author , and Smita DeSmita De More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001962.19AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are common. Per the American Urologic Association guidelines, there are two prostate size-independent surgical options: holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP). This study evaluates public search interest in these procedures compared to the “gold standard,” transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Additionally, we present a correlation of public interest trends to bibliometric analysis of scientific publications. METHODS: Search behaviors for the terms “TURP”, “HoLEP”, and “ThuLEP” were analyzed from 2006-2019 using Google Trends data. Relative interest was evaluated between individual states, and internationally. Scopus was used for bibliometric analysis of HoLEP-related publications. RESULTS: Interest in TURP was greater than HoLEP and ThuLEP, though the magnitude of increase was less than HoLEP. Results for ThuLEP were insufficient for detailed analyses. In the US, TURP interest was greatest in South Dakota, West Virginia, Idaho, New Mexico, and Tennessee. HoLEP interest was greatest in Indiana, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio (Fig 1). Indiana and Arizona were the largest contributors of HoLEP-related publications; higher publication volume corresponded to higher search interest in the US (Fig 2). HoLEP search interest was greatest in New Zealand, United Kingdom, South Korea, Italy, and Turkey (Fig 3). Worldwide, higher publication frequency did not correspond to higher search interest. CONCLUSIONS: Though rising, HoLEP generates little public interest relative to TURP. States with the highest HoLEP-related publications also have the greatest public interest in HoLEP; however, this trend was not seen worldwide. Source of Funding: N/A © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e8-e9 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Peace Orji More articles by this author Henry Wright More articles by this author Rebecca Campbell More articles by this author William Jevnikar More articles by this author Bradley Gill More articles by this author Smita De More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...