[Conflicts of interest in scientific publications and possible consequences : A critical analysis using the example of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)].

Abstract

Technological advancements in endourology rely on close collaboration between medical expertise and industrial research. While this symbiosis is essential for medical progress, it also raises potential conflicts of interest. Using the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) as an example, this study examines various mechanisms through which industry influences scientific evidence. These include selective study design, industry-sponsored educational events, and direct financial ties between industry and medical professionals. Case studies of Aquablation (ProCePT BioRobotics, San Jose CA, USA), Rezum (Boston Scientific, Marborough, MA, USA), and UroLift® (UroLift, Pleasanton, CA, USA) illustrate how methodological peculiarities in study designs and selective endpoint choices can impact the quality of evidence. The analysis underscores the need to balance technological innovation with the preservation of scientific independence. Proposed solutions include strengthening independent research funding, systematically incorporating patient preferences, and ensuring structured follow-up of long-term outcomes.