Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial

Prostatic Artery Embolisation: Do We Still Need It and for Whom?

Prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) is now endorsed by international evidence-based guidelines as a treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms presumed secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO) for selected patients. PAE is a truly minimally invasive technique, with proven efficacy and safety demonstrated for the short- to mid-term. As it has a unique treatment approach (endovascular instead of transurethral), its profile and ideal application differ clearly from other treatments for LUTS/BPO, which must be considered for patient selection. This mini review examines the role of PAE in the treatment of LUTS/BPO on the basis of current evidence. PATIENT SUMMARY: For properly selected patients, prostatic artery embolisation (PAE), in which arteries feeding the prostate are blocked in a nonsurgical procedure, is one of the treatment options for obstruction of urine outflow caused by benign enlargement of the prostate. This article examines the role of PAE according to the evidence available in the literature.

Effect of Prostate Artery Embolization on Erectile Function - A Single Center Experience of 167 Patients

BACKGROUND

Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is an emerging therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

AIM

This retrospective study was conducted to assess the effect of prostate artery embolization (PAE) on erectile function in a cohort of patients with LUTS attributable to BPH at 3-months after the procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on 167 patients who underwent PAE. Data collected included Sexual Health Inventory in Men (SHIM) scores at 3, 6, and 12 months post-PAE, in conjunction with the International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSS), Quality of Life (QoL) scores, and prostate volumes. Primary outcome was erectile function as assessed by SHIM scores at 3 months after PAE. An analysis was performed to identify patients with a ±5-point SHIM change to group them according to this minimum clinically significant difference in erectile function. Adverse events were recorded using the Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification.

OUTCOMES

At 3 months following PAE, median IPSS decreased by 16.0 [IQR, 9.0-22.0] points, median QOL decreased by 4.0 [IQR, 2.0-5.0] points, and median prostate volume decreased by 33 g [IQR, 14-55].

RESULTS

Median SHIM score was 17.0 [IQR, 12.0-22.0] at baseline, 18.0 [IQR, 14.0-23.0] at 3 months [P = .031], 19.0 [IQR, 14.5-21.5] at 6 months [P = .106] and 20 [IQR, 16.0-24.0] at 12 months [P = .010] following PAE. In patients with no erectile dysfunction (ED) at baseline, 21% (n = 9) reported some degree of decline in erectile function post-PAE. However, 38% (n = 40) of patients who presented with mild-to-moderate ED reported improvement in their erectile function 3 months following PAE. Overall, the changes in baseline SHIM score were relatively small; 82% (n = 137) of patients did not have more than 5 points of change in their SHIM scores at 3 months following PAE.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Our findings suggest PAE has no adverse impact on erectile function for most patients.

STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS

The study was performed at a single center with 1 operator's experience, and is retrospective with no control group.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that prostate artery embolization has no adverse effect on erectile function in the majority of patients with LUTS attributable to BPH at 3 months after the procedure. Bhatia S, Acharya V, Jalaeian H, et al., Effect of Prostate Artery Embolization on Erectile Function - A Single Center Experience of 167 Patients. J Sex Med 2022;19:594-602.

Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

A variety of minimally invasive surgical approaches are available as an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) is a relatively new, minimally invasive treatment approach.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of PAE compared to other procedures for treatment of LUTS in men with BPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings with no restrictions on language of publication or publication status, up to 8 November 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomized studies (NRS, limited to prospective cohort studies with concurrent comparison groups) enrolling men over the age of 40 years with LUTS attributed to BPH undergoing PAE versus TURP or other surgical interventions.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies for inclusion or exclusion and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model and interpreted them according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used GRADE guidance to rate the certainty of evidence of RCTs and NRSs.  MAIN RESULTS: We found data to inform two comparisons: PAE versus TURP (six RCTs and two NRSs), and PAE versus sham (one RCT). Mean age was 66 years, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was 22.8, and prostate volume of participants was 72.8 mL. This abstract focuses on the comparison of PAE versus TURP as the primary topic of interest. Prostatic arterial embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate We included six RCTs and two NRSs with short-term (up to 12 months) follow-up, and two RCTs and one NRS with long-term follow-up (13 to 24 months).  Short-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, there may be little to no difference in urologic symptom score improvement measured by the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) on a scale from 0 to 35, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms (mean difference [MD] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37 to 3.81; 6 RCTs, 360 participants; I² = 78%; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in quality of life as measured by the IPSS-quality of life question on a scale from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating worse quality of life between PAE and TURP, respectively (MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.84; 5 RCTs, 300 participants; I² = 63%; low-certainty evidence). While we are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on major adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.97; 4 RCTs, 250 participants; I² = 24%; very low-certainty evidence), PAE likely increases retreatments (RR 3.20, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.27; 4 RCTs, 303 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). PAE may make little to no difference in erectile function measured by the International Index of Erectile Function-5 on a scale from 1 to 25, with higher scores indicating better function (MD -0.50 points, 95% CI -5.88 to 4.88; 2 RCTs, 120 participants; I² = 68%; low-certainty evidence). Based on NRS evidence, PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.73; 1 NRS, 260 participants; low-certainty evidence). Long-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, PAE may result in little to no difference in urologic symptom scores (MD 2.58 points, 95% CI -1.54 to 6.71; 2 RCTs, 176 participants; I² = 73%; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (MD 0.50 points, 95% CI -0.03 to 1.04; 2 RCTs, 176 participants; I² = 29%; low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain about major adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.20 to 4.05; 2 RCTs, 206 participants; I² = 72%; very low-certainty evidence). PAE likely increases retreatments (RR 3.80, 95% CI 1.32 to 10.93; 1 RCT, 81 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). While PAE may result in little to no difference in erectile function (MD 3.09 points, 95% CI -0.76 to 6.94; 1 RCT, 81 participants; low-certainty evidence), PAE may reduce the occurrence of ejaculatory disorders (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.98; 1 RCT, 50 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to TURP, PAE may provide similar improvement in urologic symptom scores and quality of life. While we are very uncertain about major adverse events, PAE likely increases retreatment rates. While erectile function may be similar, PAE may reduce ejaculatory disorders. Certainty of evidence for the outcomes of this review was low or very low except for retreatment (moderate-certainty evidence), signaling that our confidence in the reported effect size is limited or very limited, and that this topic should be better informed by future research.

Prostatic artery embolization in people with spinal cord injury: a safe and effective technique to ease intermittent catheterization in case of concomitant benign prostatic hyperplasia

STUDY DESIGN

Case series.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) to reduce prostate volume (PV) and facilitate intermittent catheterization (IC) in individuals with concurrent benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and spinal cord injury (SCI).

SETTING

Italian tertiary referral center for people with SCI.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected all data of individuals undergoing PAE from 2015 to 2020 because of BPH-related problems during IC. PAE was performed under local anesthesia with superselective catheterization of the prostatic arteries. Technical success was defined as bilateral embolization. We determined pre- and post-procedural PV by magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

We considered 10 cases with tetraplegia (n = 5) and paraplegia (n = 5). Nine (90%) procedures were technically successful, while we performed monolateral PAE in one case. The median pre-procedural PV was 61 mL. After 6 months, all patients experienced significant PV reduction (median: 19.6%), and 7/7 patients with indwelling urinary catheter started successfully IC. Neither intra- nor post-procedural complications occurred within a median follow-up of 33 months.

CONCLUSIONS

PAE proved to be a safe and effective treatment for BPH to facilitate IC in people with SCI. Considering the minimal morbidity of PAE, further multi-center studies are mandatory to draw definitive conclusions and warrant its widespread adoption in this population.

Surgical Complications in the Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are a variety of treatment options for men with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH); transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the gold standard surgical treatment. The field continues to evolve with the introduction of new energy and laser technologies, increasing adoption of enucleation techniques, in addition to the advent of minimally invasive surgical technologies (MIST) that enable office-based treatments. The choice in surgical management has become very nuanced depending on a variety of patient and anatomic factors. There continues to be high success rates for surgical treatment of BPH; however, the risk profiles vary across the various surgical treatments. We sought to evaluate contemporary series and summarize the experience of complications associated with BPH treatment and management of these complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

A comprehensive literature review was performed, and identified 79 manuscripts, published between 2005 and 2021 characterizing the diagnosis and management of complications following BPH surgery. Commonly cited issues included bleeding, ureteral orifice injury, bladder neck injury, rectal injury, TURP syndrome, bladder neck contractures, urethral stricture disease, refractory OAB symptoms, and complications unique to new modalities of treatment. The practicing urologist has multiple surgical options to choose from in treating patients with symptomatic BPH. The surgical management of BPH is generally well tolerated with high objective success rates that allow for significant improvement in urinary quality of life. It is critical to understand the potential complications associated with these various treatment options, which will enable trainees and practicing urologists to better counsel patients and manage these potential complications.

Semi-Automatic MRI Feature Assessment in Small- and Medium-Volume Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia after Prostatic Artery Embolization

(1) Background: To assess the treatment response of benign prostatic syndrome (BPS) following prostatic artery embolization (PAE) using a semi-automatic software analysis of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features and clinical indexes. (2) Methods: Prospective, monocenter study of MRI and clinical data of n = 27 patients with symptomatic BPS before and (1, 6, 12 months) after PAE. MRI analysis was performed using a dedicated semi-automatic software for segmentation of the central and the total gland (CG, TG), respectively; signal intensities (SIs) of T1-weighted (T1w), T2-weighted (T2w), and diffusion-weighted images (DWI), as well as intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) and prostatic volumes (CGV, TGV), were evaluated at each time point. The semi-automatic assessed TGV was compared to conventional TGV by an ellipse formula. International prostate symptom score (IPSS) and international consultation on incontinence questionnaire−urinary incontinence short form (ICIQ-UI SF) questionnaires were used as clinical indexes. Statistical testing in the form of ANOVA, pairwise comparisons using Bonferroni correction, and multiple linear correlations, were conducted using SPSS. (3) Results: TGV was significantly reduced one, six, and 12 months after PAE as assessed by the semi-automatic approach and conventional ellipse formula (p = 0.005; p = 0.025). CGV significantly decreased after one month (p = 0.038), but showed no significant differences six and 12 months after PAE (p = 0.191; p = 0.283). IPP at baseline was demonstrated by 25/27 patients (92.6%) with a significant decrease one, six, and 12 months after treatment (p = 0.028; p = 0.010; p = 0.008). Significant improvement in IPSS and ICIQ-UI SF (p = 0.002; p = 0.016) after one month correlated moderately with TGV reduction (p = 0.031; p = 0.05, correlation coefficients 0.52; 0.69). Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of CG significantly decreased one month after embolization (p < 0.001), while there were no significant differences in T1w and T2w SIs before and after treatment at each time point. (4) Conclusions: The semi-automatic approach is appropriate for the assessment of volumetric and morphological changes in prostate MRI following PAE, able to identify significantly different ADC values post-treatment without the need for manual identification of infarct areas. Semi-automatic measured TGV reduction is significant and comparable to the TGV calculated by the conventional ellipse formula, confirming the clinical response after PAE.

Prostatic Artery Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia—A Primer for Interventional Radiologists

Male patients over 50 years with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) are potential candidates for prostatic artery embolization (PAE). PAE is not a perfect fit for all BPH patients. Careful pre- and postpostprocedural evaluation/consultation with correct selection of patients should be tailored on an individual basis. Evaluated parameters include the following: LUTS severity quantification with validated questionnaires as the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL), erectile and ejaculatory evaluation with validated questionnaires, blood tests including full blood count, coagulation profile, renal function and total/free prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume measured by multiparametric magnetic resonance (mpMR) of the prostate and/or transrectal ultrasound, uroflowmetry measuring the peak urinary flowrate (Qmax), and postvoid residual urine (PVR). Correct arterial anatomy identification with either computed tomography (CT) angiography, MR angiography, or intraprocedural cone-beam CT (CBCT) are suggested for a confident procedure and avoiding potential complications. The minimally invasive nature of PAE with a faster recovery, preserving the sexual function, and comparable results to standard prostatic surgery make the procedure an attractive choice for many male patients suffering with this condition. Patients should be informed about the potential for higher retreatment rates and shorter duration of treatment effect when compared with standard prostatic surgery. In this comprehensive review, we provide an updated toolbox for all interventional radiologists interested in the PAE practice for patients with BPH. We explain how to evaluate patients during consultation before and after PAE, describe the preprocedural imaging required, explain the technique, and narrate how to optimize outcomes. Finally, we review the level of evidence of PAE for BPH.

An Updated Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Prostatic Artery Embolization vs. Transurethral Resection of the Prostate in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Background: Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has been introduced into clinical practice, but conclusive evidence of efficacy and safety has been lacking.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) vs. transurethral resection of prostate (TURP), we performed a meta-analysis of clinical trials.

Methods: We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from Pubmed, Embase, Wanfang, and CNKI from January 2000 to December 2020 and used RevMan 5.0 to analyze the data after five RCTs were included.

Results: The reducing of prostate volume (PV) [Median mean (MD) 14.87; 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.52–22.22; P < 0.0001] and the increasing of maximum flow rate in free uroflowmetry (Qmax) (MD 3.73; 95% CI 0.19–7.27; P = 0.004) were more obvious in TURP than in PAE; however, the rate of lower sexual dysfunction [odds ratio (OR) 0.12; 95% CI 0.05–0.30; P < 0.00001] was lower in PAE compared with TURP. Meanwhile, no conspicuous difference in International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) score (MD 1.42; 95% CI −0.92 to 3.75; P = 0.23), quality of life (Qol) score (MD 0.21; 95% CI −0.31 to 0.73; P = 0.43), post void residual (PVR) (MD 21.16; 95% CI −5.58 to 47.89; P = 0.12), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (MD 0.56; 95% CI −0.15 to 1.27; P = 0.12), and complications (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.20–4.05; P = 0.89) between PAE and TURP group was shown.

Conclusion: PAE may replace TURP as an alternative treatment for Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients who do not want to have surgery or with operational contraindications.

Prostatic Artery Embolization for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms via Transradial Versus Transfemoral Artery Access: Single-Center Technical Outcomes

Objective

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) via transradial access (TRA) compared with transfemoral access (TFA).

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study included 53 consecutive men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) who underwent PAE between September 2018 and September 2021. Thirty-one patients (mean age ± standard deviation: 70.6 ± 8.4 years) were treated with TFA, including 14 patients treated before adopting TRA. Since December 2019, TRA has also been attempted with the procedure’s selection criteria of patent carpal circulation and a height ≤ 172 cm, with 22 patients treated via TRA (69.1 ± 9.6 years). Parameters of technical success (defined as successful bilateral embolization), clinical success (defined as LUTS improvement), procedural time, radiation dose, and adverse events were compared between the two groups using the Fisher’s exact test, independent sample t test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, or Mann-Whitney test.

Results

All patients received at least one-side PAE. Technical success of PAE was achieved in most patients (TRA, 21/22; TFA, 30/31; p > 0.999). No technical problem-related conversion from TRA to TFA occurred. The clinical success rate was 85% (11/13) in patients with TRA, and 89% (16/18) in patients with TFA for follow-up > 2 weeks post-PAE (median, 3 months) (p > 0.999). The median procedure time was similar in both groups (TRA, 81 minutes vs. TFA, 94 minutes; p = 0.570). No significant dose differences were found between the TRA and TFA groups in the dose-area product (median Gycm², 95 [range, 44–255] for TRA and 84 [34–255] for TFA; p = 0.678) or cumulative air kerma (median mGy, 609 [236–1584] for TRA and 634 [217–1594] for TFA; p = 0.551). No major adverse events occurred in either of the groups.

Conclusion

PAE via TRA is a safe and feasible method comparable to conventional TFA. It can be safely implemented by selecting patients with patent carpal circulation and adequate height.

Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) Using Polyethylene Glycol Microspheres: Safety and Efficacy in 81 Patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) using polyethylene glycol microspheres (PEGM) in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicentric prospective study enrolled 81 patients who underwent PAE with 400 ± 75 µm PEGM (HydroPearl®, Terumo, Japan). Results from baseline and 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups were assessed for subjective outcomes including International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS), Quality of life (QoL), and International Index of Erectile Function, and objective outcomes such as peak urinary flow (Qmax) and post-void residual volume (PVR). The visual analogue scale, satisfaction questionnaire, prostatic volume, and prostatic specific antigen levels were also evaluated. Complications were documented using the modified Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

Technical success was obtained in all patients. Clinical success was achieved in 78.5% of patients. Before PAE, 54.3% of patients had an indwelling catheter which was removed in 75% of them after procedure. A statistically significant decrease was observed in IPSS and QoL from baseline to 12 months (20.14 vs 5.89; 4.8 vs 0.63, P < .01), respectively. Objective outcomes also showed a statistically significant improvement in Qmax (+ 114.9%; P < .01), achieving a maximum urinary flow of 14.2 mL/sec, and PVR (decrease 58%; P < .05) at 12 months. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo grades I-II) occurred in 13.6% of patients, without major complications observed.

CONCLUSION

PAE with PEGM is safe and effective treatment in patients with symptomatic BPH, with a significant improvement in both subjective and objective outcomes.

Surgical treatment options for benign prostatic obstruction: beyond prostate volume

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Many surgical treatment options are available for patients who present with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). This article reviews the current treatment options available and distinguishes them based on five clinical considerations: antithrombotic therapy, sexual function preservation, ambulatory procedures, anesthesia-related risks and duration of catheterization.

RECENT FINDINGS

A comprehensive review of the literature was performed on 10 BPO procedures. Laser enucleation of the prostate (LEP), bipolar plasma transurethral vaporization of the prostate and photoselective vaporization (PVP) of the prostate reduces the risk of bleeding, which is recommended for anticoagulated men. Ejaculatory function is more likely to be preserved following transurethral incision of the prostate, Rezūm, Aquablation, UroLift and iTind. Same-day discharge is possible for LEP, PVP and prostatic arterial embolization (PAE). For patients with high anesthesia-related risks, procedures compatible with local anesthesia (UroLift, Rezūm, iTind and PAE) should be favored. Catheterization duration is shorter with UroLift, PVP and LEP.

SUMMARY

BPO treatment options are growing rapidly. The optimal procedure for a given patient is based on factors such as associated risks, recovery and expected outcomes. Besides prostate volume, the clinical considerations in the present article can help elucidate the best surgical BPO treatment option for each patient based on their values, preferences, and risk tolerance.

Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To review and indirectly compare the outcomes of minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search via Medline and Cochrane Central databases was completed for randomized control studies published between January 2000 to April 2020 for the following therapies: Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, and prostate artery embolization (PAE). Data on the following variables were included: international Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), quality of life (QoL), and post-void residual (PVR). Standard mean differences between treatments were compared through a meta-analysis using transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to assess differences in treatment effect.

RESULTS

No significant difference in outcomes between therapies were noted for IPSS at the 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Although outcomes for rezum were only available out to 3 months, there were no consistently significant differences in outcomes when comparing Aquablation vs PAE vs Rezum. TURP PVR was significantly better than Urolift at 3-, 6-, and 12 months. No significant differences in minor or major AEs were noted.

CONCLUSION

Although significant differences in outcomes were limited, aquablation and PAE were the most durable at 12 months. PAE has been well studied on multiple randomized control trials with minimal adverse events while aquablation has limited high quality data and has been associated with bleeding-related complications.

Minimally invasive treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a Cochrane network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the comparative effectiveness and ranking of minimally invasive treatments (MITs) for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched multiple databases up to 24 February 2021. We included randomized controlled trials assessing the following treatments: convective radiofrequency water vapour thermal therapy (WVTT; or Rezūm); prostatic arterial embolization (PAE); prostatic urethral lift (PUL; or Urolift); temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND); and transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) compared to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or sham surgery. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included 27 trials involving 3017 men. The overall certainty of the evidence of most outcomes according to GRADE was low to very low. Compared to TURP, we found that PUL and PAE may result in little to no difference in urological symptoms, while WVTT, TUMT and TIND may result in worse urological symptoms. MITs may result in little to no difference in quality of life, compared to TURP. MITs may result in a large reduction in major adverse events compared to TURP. We were uncertain about the effects of PAE and PUL on retreatment compared to TURP, however, TUMT may result in higher retreatment rates. We were very uncertain of the effects of MITs on erectile function and ejaculatory function. Among MITs, PUL and PAE had the highest likelihood of being the most efficacious for urinary symptoms and quality of life, TUMT for major adverse events, WVTT and TIND for erectile function and PUL for ejaculatory function. Excluding WVTT and TIND, for which there were only studies with short-term (3-month) follow-up, PUL had the highest likelihood of being the most efficacious for retreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive treatments may result in similar or worse effects concerning urinary symptoms and quality of life compared to TURP at short-term follow-up.

[Minimally invasive treatment options for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia]

Benign prostatic hyperplasia is one of the most common diseases of aging men. Hyperplasia of the glandular tissue can cause distressing lower urinary tract symptoms, which can be treated with both drugs and interventions. For a long time, transurethral resection of the prostate and simple prostatectomy were considered the gold standard of surgical treatment. In order to be able to offer patients an outpatient treatment with few complications, shorter hospital stays and high efficiency, a variety of minimally invasive treatment options have been developed. While recommendations have already been made for the excision by focused waterjet, prostatic urethral lift, and prostatic artery embolization, there are several other very promising procedures for which, however, long-term data and data from comparative studies with reference procedures must still be awaited.

Do Minimally Invasive Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatments Preserve Sexual Function? A Contemporary Review of the Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study is to compare the sexual function outcomes related to minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) (UroLift^®, Rezum™, Aquablation^®, prostate artery embolization, and iTind^®) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical trials and retrospective data evaluating MISTs for BPH have demonstrated improved or stable sexual function outcomes when compared to sham control or transurethral resection of the prostate. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and following treatments using patient-reported outcome measures. Rezum and Aquablation demonstrated preservation of overall ejaculatory function and erectile function at 36-month follow-up. Similar outcomes occurred with UroLift after a 60-month follow-up. Erectile function was preserved following prostate artery embolization and iTIND up to 12 months. MIST for the management of BPH has been demonstrated to be effective in improving urinary function and appears to minimize potential collateral damage on sexual function following treatment.

Efficacy of dexamethasone in reducing the postembolisation syndrome in men undergoing prostatic artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: protocol for a single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial-the 'DEXAPAE' study

INTRODUCTION

Postembolisation syndrome (PES) is the most common side effect of vascular embolisation of solid organs. Although prophylactic corticosteroids are known to reduce the incidence and severity of PES, no trials investigating their efficacy have been conducted in men undergoing prostatic artery embolisation (PAE). We postulate that steroids can have a similar effect in reducing PES after PAE. This paper describes the rationale and detailed protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of dexamethasone (DEXA) in reducing PES after PAE.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we will enrol 60 individuals undergoing PAE for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Participants will be randomised to receive IV DEXA (24 mg) or placebo (saline). The primary outcomes will be postprocedural fever, pain and quality of life. The secondary outcomes will include postprocedural nausea, postprocedural medicine usage, laboratory parameters (C reactive protein, prostate-specific antigen) and early PAE results.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the Danish Committee on Health Research Ethics in the Capital Region (H-20025910). The results from this trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and national and international presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04588857; EudraCT number: 2020-000915-53.

1-year cost-utility analysis of prostate artery embolization (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)

Objective

To determine whether prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a cost-effective alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the management of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) after 1-year follow-up.

Design, setting and main outcome measures

A retrospective cost-utility analysis over a 12-month time period was conducted to compare the two interventions from a National Health Service perspective. Effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from data collected during the observational UK Register of Prostate Embolisation (UK-ROPE) Study. Costs for both PAE and TURP were derived from University Hospital Southampton, a tertiary referral centre for BPH and the largest contributor to the UK-ROPE. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was derived from cost and QALY values associated with both interventions to assess the cost-effectiveness of PAE versus TURP. Further sensitivity analyses involved a decision tree model to account for the impact of patient-reported complications on the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

Results

The mean patient age for TURP (n=31) and PAE (n=133) was 69 and 65.6 years, respectively. In comparison to TURP, PAE was cheaper due to shorter patient stays and the lack of necessity for an operating theatre. Analysis revealed an ICER of £64 798.10 saved per QALY lost when comparing PAE to TURP after 1-year follow-up.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that PAE is initially a cost-effective alternative to TURP for the management of BPH after 1-year follow-up. Due to a higher reintervention rate in the PAE group, this benefit may be lost in subsequent years.

Trial registration number

NCT02434575.

Prostate Artery Embolization-Review of Indications, Patient Selection, Techniques and Results

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) are a very common problem in men ranging from mild urinary symptoms to recurrent urinary tract infections or renal failure. Numerous treatment options are available ranging from conservative medical therapies to more invasive surgical options. Prostate artery embolization (PAE) has emerged as a novel treatment option for this common problem with clinical efficacy comparable to the current surgical gold standard, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). PAE offers fewer complications and side effects without a need for general anesthesia or hospitalization. This review discusses the indications for prostate artery embolization in addition to LUTS, patient evaluation in patients with LUTS, PAE technique and clinical results, with an emphasis on efficacy and safety.

Characterization of a Novel Implant Intended to Expand and Reshape the Prostatic Urethra for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Pre-Clinical Feasibility Study in the Canine Model

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety, feasibility, and tissue response of a novel device for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia, using the first-generation Urocross Expander System (Mercury Expander System).

METHODS

The implant was deployed and retrieved using flexible cystoscope in 8 adult male canines, separated into three study arms by retrieval date (1-, 6-, and 12- months post-deployment). Cystoscopy and urethrograms verified implant position/diameter; bladder neck and external sphincter function/changes; prostatic tissue response; and implant condition. One-month post-retrieval, the prostate and surrounding tissue was sectioned and evaluated by a veterinary pathologist.

RESULTS

All implants were successfully deployed in the prostatic urethra. Urethral width was increased (6.9 ± 1.8 mm to 10.2 ± 0.6 mm, P = .012) and preserved through the dwell period. Urethral length and sphincter diameters didn't significantly change. All subjects (n = 8) remained continent without obstruction or retention. Adverse events included incisional site bleeding (n = 2) and transient hematuria (n = 3). One implant migrated into the bladder and spontaneously repositioned into the prostatic urethra. Post-retrieval, explant surfaces demonstrated no tissue growth, encrustation or stone formation. Imaging revealed contact site erythema and indentation, but no stones, strictures, perforations, erosions, nor ulcerations. Histopathology revealed glandular acinar changes, inflammation, and fibrosis.

CONCLUSION

The first generation of the Urocross Expander System demonstrated a favorable safety profile in the canine model. Changes in the prostatic urethra shape were noted with an increase in urethral width during the dwell period with minimal tissue changes. Further, the implant didn't demonstrate any encrustation, tissue growth or stone formation.

Therapeutic Effects of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D on the Pathological Process of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: An In Vitro Evidence

The pathogenesis of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is extremely complicated which involving the multiple signaling pathways. The deficiency of vitamin D is an important risk factor for BPH, and exogenous vitamin D is effective for the treatment of BPH. In this study, we provided in vitro mechanical evidence of vitamin D as a treatment for BPH using BPH-1, WPMY-1, and PBMC cells. We found that 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25-OH D) level is decreased in BPH and closely correlated with age, prostate volume, maximum flow, international prostate symptom score, and prostate-specific antigen of the BPH patients. We further revealed that 25-OH D ameliorated TGF-β1 induces epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) of BPH-1 cells and proliferation of WPMY-1 cells via blocking TGF-β signaling. Moreover, 25-OH D was able to block NF-κB signaling in PBMCs of BPH patients and STAT3 signaling in BPH cells to relieve inflammation. 25-OH D also protects BPH cells from inflammatory cytokines selected by PBMCs. Finally, we uncovered that 25-OH D alleviated prostate cell oxidative stress by triggering Nrf2 signaling. In conclusion, our data verified that 25-OH D regulated multiple singling pathways to restrain prostate cell EMT, proliferation, inflammation, and oxidative stress. Our study provides in vitro mechanical evidence to support clinical use of vitamin D as a treatment for BPH.

New Ultra-minimally Invasive Surgical Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Systematic Review and Analysis of Comparative Outcomes

Context

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) associated with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) is diagnosed in up to 80% of men during their lifetime. Several novel ultra-minimally invasive surgical treatments (uMISTs) for BPH/benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) have become available over the past 5 yr.

Objective

To evaluate the perioperative and functional outcomes of recently introduced uMISTs for BPH/BPO, including Urolift, Rezūm, temporary implantable nitinol device, prostatic artery embolization (PAE), and intraprostatic injection.

Evidence acquisition

A systematic literature search was conducted in December 2020 using Medline (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), Scopus, and Web of Science (registered on PROSPERO as CRD42021225014). The search strategy used PICO criteria and article selection was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias and the quality of the articles included were assessed. A dedicated data extraction form was used to collect the data of interest. Pooled and cumulative analyses were performed to compare perioperative and functional outcomes between study groups. A random-effects model using the DerSimonian and Laird method was used to evaluate heterogeneity. Stata version 15.0 software was used for all statistical analyses.

Evidence synthesis

The initial electronic search identified 3978 papers, of which 48 ultimately met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Pooled analysis revealed a uMIST benefit in terms of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS; −9.81 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] −11.37 to −8.25 at 1 mo; −13.13 points, 95% CI −14.98 to −11.64 at 12 mo), maximum flow rate (from +3.66 ml/s, 95% CI 2.8–4.5 to +4.14 ml/s, 95% CI 0.72–7.56 at 12 mo), and postvoid residual volume (−10.10 ml, 95% CI −27.90 to 7.71 at 12 mo). No negative impact was observed on scores for the International Index of Erectile Function-5, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire-Ejaculatory Dysfunction bother and function scales (overall postintervention change in pooled median score of 1.88, 95% CI 1.34–2.42 at the start of follow-up; and 1.04, 95% CI 0.28–1.8 after 1 yr), or the IPSS-Quality of Life questionnaire.

Conclusions

Novel uMISTs can yield fast and effective relief of LUTS without affecting patient quality of life. Only Rezūm, UroLift, and PAE had a minimal impact on patients’ sexual function with respect to baseline, especially regarding preservation of ejaculation.

Patient summary

We reviewed outcomes for recently introduced ultra-minimally invasive surgical treatments for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostate enlargement or obstruction. The evidence suggests that these novel techniques are beneficial in terms of controlling symptoms while preserving sexual function.

Take Home  Message

Novel ultra-minimally invasive treatments can yield fast and effective relief of lower urinary tract symptoms without affecting a patient’s quality of life.

Prostatic Artery Embolization: Indications, Preparation, Techniques, Imaging Evaluation, Reporting, and Complications

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a noncancerous growth of the transitional zone of the prostate, which surrounds the prostatic urethra. Consequently, it can cause lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and bladder outlet obstruction symptoms that may substantially reduce a patient's quality of life. Several treatments are available for BPH, including medications such as α-blockers and 5α-reductase inhibitors and surgical options including transurethral resection of the prostate and prostatectomy. Recently, prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has emerged as a minimally invasive treatment option for selected men with BPH and moderate to severe LUTS. Adequate pre- and postprocedural evaluations with clinical examinations and questionnaires, laboratory tests, and urodynamic and imaging examinations (particularly US, MRI, and CT) are of key importance to achieve successful treatment. Considering that the use of PAE has been increasing in tertiary hospital facilities, radiologists and interventional radiologists should be aware of the main technical concepts of PAE and the key features to address in imaging reports in pre- and postprocedural settings. An invited commentary by Lopera is available online. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2021.

Prostatic Artery Embolization Versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: A Post Hoc Cost Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To perform a post hoc analysis of patient-incurred costs in a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing prostatic artery embolization (PAE) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients older than 60 years with indication of TURP were randomized to PAE or TURP procedure. After intervention and hospital discharge, patients were follow-up during 12 months The associated patient costs were categorized according to the study period: pre-intervention, intervention, hospitalization, and follow-up. Several items for both groups were analyzed within each study period.

RESULTS

The mean total costs per patient were lower for PAE (€ 3,192.87) than for TURP (€ 3,974.57), with this difference of € 781.70 being significant (p = 0.026). For most evaluated items, the mean costs were significantly higher for TURP. No significant differences were observed in the mean costs of PAE (€ 1,468.00) and TURP (€ 1,684.25) procedures (p = 0.061). However, the histopathology analysis, recovery room stay, and intraoperative laboratory analysis increased the interventional costs for TURP (€ 1,999.70) compared with PAE (€ 1,468.00) (p < 0.001). No cost differences were observed between PAE (€ 725.26) and TURP (€ 556.22) during the 12 months of follow-up (p = 0.605). None of patients required a repeat intervention during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the short-term follow-up, PAE was associated with significantly lower costs compared with TURP. Future investigations in the context of routine clinical practice should be aimed at comparing the long-term effectiveness of both procedures and determining their cost-effectiveness.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1 (a-c).

Improving the reporting of non-inferiority trials by incorporating non-efficacy benefits: not all on-inferiority trials are created equal

Non-inferiority trials are used to test if a novel intervention is not worse than a standard treatment by more than a prespecified amount, the non-inferiority margin (ΔNI). The ΔNI indicates the amount of efficacy loss in the primary outcome that is acceptable in exchange for non-efficacy benefits in other outcomes. However, non-inferiority designs are sometimes used when non-efficacy benefits are absent. Without non-efficacy benefits, loss in efficacy cannot be easily justified. Further, non-efficacy benefits are scarcely defined or considered by trialists when determining the magnitude of and providing justification for the non-inferiority margin. This is problematic as the importance of a treatment's non-efficacy benefits are critical to understanding the results of a non-inferiority study. Here we propose the routine reporting in non-inferiority trial protocols and publications of non-efficacy benefits of the novel intervention along with the reporting of non-inferiority margins and their justification. The justification should include the specific trade-off between the accepted loss in efficacy (ΔNI) and the non-efficacy benefits of the novel treatment and should describe whether patients and other relevant stakeholders were involved in the definition of the ΔNI.

Prostate Artery Embolization Using N-Butyl Cyanoacrylate Glue for Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Valid Alternative to Microparticles?

Our goal was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and short-term outcomes of prostate artery embolization (PAE) with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) glue as the only embolic agent in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs). A two-center retrospective study of 50 patients (mean age, 67.6 ± 7.4 years; range, 54-85 years) treated with NBCA between 2017 and 2020 was conducted. PAE was performed using a mixture of Glubran 2 glue and Lipiodol in a 1:8 ratio, under local anesthesia, on an outpatient basis, after cone-beam computed tomography vascular mapping. Mean total injected NBCA/Lipiodol volume was 0.9 ± 0.3 mL, total injection time was 21.9 ± 7.8 s, and total radiation dose was 18,458 ± 16,397 mGy·cm. Statistically significant improvements over time occurred for the International Prostate Symptoms Score (9.9 ± 6.8 versus 20.5 ± 6.7, p = 0.0001), quality-of-life score (2.2 ± 1.5 versus 4.9 ± 1.0, p = 0.0001), prostate-specific antigen level (4.6 ± 3.0 versus 6.4 ± 3.7, p = 0.0001), and prostate volume (77.3 ± 30.5 versus 98.3 ± 40.2, p = 0.0001) at a median of 3 months versus baseline. Minor adverse events developed in 11/50 (22%) patients, but no major complications occurred. The International Index of Erectile Function did not change significantly. PAE with NBCA is feasible, safe, fast, and effective for patients with BPH-related LUTSs. Prospective comparative studies with longer follow-ups are warranted.

Minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A variety of minimally invasive treatments are available as an alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, it is unclear which treatments provide better results.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess the comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms in men with BPH through a network meta-analysis. Our secondary objective was to obtain an estimate of relative ranking of these minimally invasive treatments, according to their effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of multiple databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings, up to 24 February 2021. We had no restrictions on language of publication or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-group randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of the following minimally invasive treatments, compared to TURP or sham treatment, on men with moderate to severe LUTS due to BPH: convective radiofrequency water vapor therapy (CRFWVT); prostatic arterial embolization (PAE); prostatic urethral lift (PUL); temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND); and transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model for pair-wise comparisons and a frequentist network meta-analysis for combined estimates. We interpreted them according to Cochrane methods. We planned subgroup analyses by age, prostate volume, and severity of baseline symptoms. We used risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to express dichotomous data and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs to express continuous data. We used the GRADE approach to rate the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 trials involving 3017 men, mostly over age 50, with severe LUTS due to BPH. The overall certainty of evidence was low to very low due to concerns regarding bias, imprecision, inconsistency (heterogeneity), and incoherence. Based on the network meta-analysis, results for our main outcomes were as follows. Urologic symptoms (19 studies, 1847 participants): PUL and PAE may result in little to no difference in urologic symptoms scores (MD of International Prostate Symptoms Score [IPSS]) compared to TURP (3 to 12 months; MD range 0 to 35; higher scores indicate worse symptoms; PUL: 1.47, 95% CI -4.00 to 6.93; PAE: 1.55, 95% CI -1.23 to 4.33; low-certainty evidence). CRFWVT, TUMT, and TIND may result in worse urologic symptoms scores compared to TURP at short-term follow-up, but the CIs include little to no difference (CRFWVT: 3.6, 95% CI -4.25 to 11.46; TUMT: 3.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 7.10; TIND: 7.5, 95% CI -0.68 to 15.69; low-certainty evidence). Quality of life (QoL) (13 studies, 1459 participants): All interventions may result in little to no difference in the QoL scores, compared to TURP (3 to 12 months; MD of IPSS-QoL score; MD range 0 to 6; higher scores indicate worse symptoms; PUL: 0.06, 95% CI -1.17 to 1.30; PAE: 0.09, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.75; CRFWVT: 0.37, 95% CI -1.45 to 2.20; TUMT: 0.65, 95% CI -0.48 to 1.78; TIND: 0.87, 95% CI -1.04 to 2.79; low-certainty evidence). Major adverse events (15 studies, 1573 participants): TUMT probably results in a large reduction of major adverse events compared to TURP (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.43; moderate-certainty evidence). PUL, CRFWVT, TIND and PAE may also result in a large reduction in major adverse events, but CIs include substantial benefits and harms at three months to 36 months; PUL: RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.22; CRFWVT: RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.01 to 18.62; TIND: RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.01 to 24.46; PAE: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.68; low-certainty evidence). Retreatment (10 studies, 799 participants): We are uncertain about the effects of PAE and PUL on retreatment compared to TURP (12 to 60 months; PUL: RR 2.39, 95% CI 0.51 to 11.1; PAE: RR 4.39, 95% CI 1.25 to 15.44; very low-certainty evidence). TUMT may result in higher retreatment rates (RR 9.71, 95% CI 2.35 to 40.13; low-certainty evidence). Erectile function (six studies, 640 participants): We are very uncertain of the effects of minimally invasive treatments on erectile function (MD of International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF-5]; range 5 to 25; higher scores indicates better function; CRFWVT: 6.49, 95% CI -8.13 to 21.12; TIND: 5.19, 95% CI -9.36 to 19.74; PUL: 3.00, 95% CI -5.45 to 11.44; PAE: -0.03, 95% CI -6.38, 6.32; very low-certainty evidence). Ejaculatory dysfunction (eight studies, 461 participants): We are uncertain of the effects of PUL, PAE and TUMT on ejaculatory dysfunction compared to TURP (3 to 12 months; PUL: RR 0.05, 95 % CI 0.00 to 1.06; PAE: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.92; TUMT: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.68; low-certainty evidence). TURP is the reference treatment with the highest likelihood of being the most efficacious for urinary symptoms, QoL and retreatment, but the least favorable in terms of major adverse events, erectile function and ejaculatory function. Among minimally invasive procedures, PUL and PAE have the highest likelihood of being the most efficacious for urinary symptoms and QoL, TUMT for major adverse events, PUL for retreatment, CRFWVT and TIND for erectile function and PUL for ejaculatory function.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive treatments may result in similar or worse effects concerning urinary symptoms and QoL compared to TURP at short-term follow-up. They may result in fewer major adverse events, especially in the case of PUL and PAE; resulting in better rankings for symptoms scores. PUL may result in fewer retreatments compared to other interventions, especially TUMT, which had the highest retreatment rates at long-term follow-up. We are very uncertain about the effects of these interventions on erectile function. There was limited long-term data, especially for CRFWVT and TIND. Future high-quality studies with more extended follow-up, comparing different, active treatment modalities, and adequately reporting critical outcomes relevant to patients, including those related to sexual function, could provide more information on the relative effectiveness of these interventions.

Symptomatic Improvement of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 4 Different Minimally Invasive Therapies

PURPOSE

To review and compare the outcomes of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with 3 other minimally invasive surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia, including photoselective vaporization (PVP), prostatic urethral lift (PUL), and water vapor thermal therapy (WV).

METHODS

A literature review was used to identify 35 publications, which included 2,653 patients (studies, patients): PVP (13, 949), PUL (9, 577), WV (3, 330), and PAE (10, 728). The international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and the international index of erectile function (IIEF-5) and quality of life (QOL) scores were recorded at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Meta-analyses, pooling the standardized mean difference between scores recorded before and after treatment, were conducted for each modality and time point to assess the magnitude of a therapy's effect to yield pooled effect sizes. A negative score indicates IPSS and QOL improvement. A positive score indicates IIEF-5 improvement.

RESULTS

At 6 and 12 months, the IPSS and QOL were most improved after PVP, followed by that after PAE, PUL, and, lastly, WV (measured only at 12 months). Between 6 and 12 months, the IPSS and QOL improved with PAE and worsened with PVP and PUL. Only PAE demonstrated statistical improvement in the IIEF-5, which improved from 6 to 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

PVP and PAE resulted in the largest improvements in the IPSS and QOL. Only PAE resulted in improvement of the IIEF-5.

Are all procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia created equal? A systematic review on post-procedural PSA dynamics and its correlation with relief of bladder outlet obstruction

PURPOSE

To evaluate and provide a comprehensive literature review of Prostate specific antigen (PSA) dynamics after various surgical procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

A thorough PubMed database search was performed over last 30 years including terms "PSA" and various surgical procedures for BPH. PSA nadir after various procedure was evaluated. The post-operative improvement in International Prostate Symptom Score, maximum void rates and post-void residue after surgeries were recorded. An indirect correlation was made between PSA nadir and outcome of various BPH surgical procedures.

RESULTS

Enucleation procedures like simple prostatectomy and endoscopic enucleation of prostate (EEP) produced maximum drop in PSA level after surgery and were associated with the highest improvement in post-operative parameters. The PSA nadir following resection techniques like transurethral resection of prostate and Holmium laser resection of prostate and vaporization technique was variable and less robust when compared to EEP. Newer techniques like Aquablation, Rezum, Urolift, Prostate artery embolization and Temporary implantable nitinol devices (iTIND) produce relatively less reduction in PSA and lesser percentile improvement in post-operative parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Various surgical procedures for BPH result in varying PSA nadirs level. Enucleation procedures and simple prostatectomy produce the most drastic and sustained decrease in PSA. There is a possible indirect evidence suggesting that the level of PSA nadir corresponds closely with the degree of post-operative improvement and durability of the procedure. Establishing the new PSA nadir at 3-6 months after the procedure is recommended as a part of routine surveillance for prostate cancer in eligible patients.

Prostatic Artery Embolization: An Alternative Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Purpose Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative for patients with prostates >80 mL and has demonstrated lower morbidity rates. We sought to evaluate PAE at a single tertiary medical center. Methods A retrospective review of all patients who underwent PAE was completed. Demographic, clinicopathologic, procedure, and outcome data were collected to include international prostatic symptom score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) assessments. Results The pre-PAE mean prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 8.4 ng/mL, mean prostate volume was 146.9 mL (9% >200 mL), and mean postvoid residual (PVR) was 208.2 mL (21.9% 200–300 mL). IPSS mean was 19.8 and QoL was “mostly dissatisfied.” Following PAE, mean PSA was reduced by 3.2 ng/mL (38.1%, p = 0.3014), the mean prostate volume reduction was 59.2 mL (40.3%, n = 19, p < 0.0001), and the average PVR reduction was 150.3 mL (72.2%, n = 27, p = 0.0002). Average IPSS score was also lower (11.9; 60.1%, n = 25, p < 0.0001) and QoL was reduced to “mostly satisfied” (p < 0.0001). Technical success was 100% with 24% minor morbidities. Conclusion PAE is a successful treatment for patients with BPH resulting in large prostates that are not good candidates for simple prostatectomy, providing optimal care with less operative and postoperative complications.

Prostatic Artery Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Anatomical Aspects and Radiation Considerations from a Case Series of 210 Patients

Context Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has been established as a safe and effective treatment option for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Thorough knowledge of detailed prostatic artery (PA) anatomy is essential.

Aims The aim of this study was to provide a pictorial review of PA anatomy and prevalence of related anatomical variants, in addition to other anatomical and radiation dose considerations.

Settings and Design Case series and review of literature.

Materials and Methods We performed PAE for 210 patients from November 2015 to November 2020 under local anesthesia only. Anatomy, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, technical success, and complications were analyzed.

Statistical Analysis Used Descriptive statistics were analyzed using Microsoft Excel software.

Results A total of 210 patients (420 sides) were analyzed. Double arterial supply on the same side was noted in 12 patients (5.7%). In 10 patients (4.7%), only a unilateral PA was identified. In two patients (0.9%), no PA could be identified. Frequencies of PA origins were calculated. Penile, rectal, and vesical anastomoses were identified with 79 (18.8%), 54 (12.9%), and 41 (9.8%) of PAs, respectively. Median skin radiation dose, procedure time, and fluoroscopy time were 505 mGy, 73 and 38 minutes, respectively. Complications occurred in nine patients (4.3%), none of them was major.

Conclusions Knowledge of PA anatomy is essential when treating BPH by PAE for optimum results. There is no enough evidence to support routine use of preoperative computed tomography angiography and intraoperative cone-beam computed tomography as means of improving safety or efficacy.

Comparison of water vapor thermal therapy and prostate artery embolization for fragile patients with indwelling urinary catheters: Preliminary results from a multi-institutional study

PURPOSE

To report our preliminary experience with water vapor thermal therapy with the Rezūm™ System and Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) for treatment of medically refractory, complete urinary retention to achieve successful cessation of catheter dependency in frail-patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multi-institutional study was conducted including all patients who underwent Rezūm™ procedure and PAE between October 2017 and June 2020. The included population focused on frail-patients unsuitable for conventional surgery with complete urinary retention. Rezūm™ patients were identified and matched (1:1) with patients who underwent PAE. The matching criteria were age, Charlson score, prostate volume and duration of follow-up. The primary outcome was catheter-free survival, defined as spontaneous voiding and release from catheter dependence.

RESULTS

Eleven patients from the Rezūm™ group were matched to 11 embolized patients. PAE and Rezūm™ patients were comparable in age (median: 77 vs. 75 years), Charlson score (median: 6 vs. 6) and prostate volume (74 vs. 60 cc). Procedures were significantly longer in the PAE group compared to the Rezūm™ procedures (median: 148 vs. 8min, P<0.001). After a median follow-up of 12 months, spontaneous voiding was conserved in all cases (100%) after the Rezūm™ procedure and in 5 cases (45.4%) after PAE (P=0.01). In catheter-free patients, the rate of benign prostatic hyperplasia medication use after procedure was 40% for PAE and 18.2% for Rezūm™ patients (P=0.54).

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary experience for treatment of complete urinary retention in frail-patients shows the feasibility of PAE and Rezūm™ to restore spontaneous urination without being associated with the occurrence of major complications. Early data suggests that Rezūm™ may provide superior results in terms of cessation of catheter dependence. Future studies are needed to definitively assess which treatment would be best suited for each patient.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Erectile Function Following Surgery for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

CONTEXT

Benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) is associated with sexual dysfunction. Furthermore, numerous BPO interventions may themselves impact sexual function.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review with network meta-analysis to evaluate how BPO interventions affect erectile function.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Three databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical interventions for BPO. The primary outcome was postoperative International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5) score at ten time points up to 72 mo. A random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis with meta-regression was performed. In comparison to monopolar transurethral resection (mTURP), the mean difference (MD) with 95% credible interval (CrI) and rank probability (rank p) were calculated for interventions. The mean baseline score was studied in meta-regression. τ² values were used to quantify heterogeneity.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 48 papers (33 RCTs, 5159 patients, 16 interventions) were included. Prostatic urethral lift (PUL) ranked highest at 1 mo (MD 3.88, 95% CrI -0.47 to 8.25; rank p = 0.742), 6 mo (MD 2.43, 95% CrI -0.72 to 5.62; rank p = 0.581), 12 mo (MD 2.94, 95% CrI -0.26 to 6.12, rank p = 0.782), and 24 mo (MD 3.63, 95% CrI 0.14 to 7.11; rank p = 0.948), at which point statistical significance was reached. At time points up to 60 mo, there were no statistically significant comparisons for other interventions. Analyses were not possible at 18, 48, or 72 mo. β did not reach statistical significance in meta-regression. τ² was highest at 1 mo (0.56) and 60 mo (0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

PUL ranked highly and resulted in erectile function improvement at 24 mo compared to mTURP, but direct evidence is lacking. We did not observe significant differences in erectile function following other interventions up to 60 mo. Owing to heterogeneity, our conclusions are weakest at 1 and 60 mo. Further RCTs comparing sexual function outcomes are recommended, such as PUL versus holmium laser or bipolar enucleation.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Different surgical treatments can be used to treat benign enlargement of the prostate causing urinary problems. We compared the effects of various treatments on erectile function at time points up to 5 years after surgery. Compared to surgical removal of some of the prostate gland (transurethral resection of the prostate, TURP), a technique called prostatic urethral lift resulted in better erectile function scores at 24 months. However, other treatments did not differ in their effect on erectile function.

How I Handle Retreatment of LUTS Following a Failed MIST

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The goal of this paper is to review retreatment management after failed minimally invasive treatment (MIST) of various technologies.

RECENT FINDINGS

A failed MIST can be defined by the return, persistence, or worsening of LUTS, as documented by symptom scores. Persistence, development, or recurrence of comorbidities such as recurrent urinary tract infection (UTI), retention, stones, hematuria, and incontinence can also signal a failed MIST. The common etiology for MIST failure is the preoperative consequence of long-term bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) on the bladder function. Close monitoring of therapies with antimuscarinics or beta-agonists can be empirically utilized if post-void bladder residual (PVR) is low. If there is a high PVR, urodynamic studies and cystoscopy can be used to determine overactive bladder (OAB), BOO, or necrosis. Depending on the timing of the observed BOO/OAB, subsequent retreatments involving transurethral debridement, medical and behavioral therapies, or repeat surgical debulking can be employed.

Prostatic Artery Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Treatment: A Russian Multicenter Study in More Than 1,000 Treated Patients

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common diseases of the genitourinary system. The prevalence of BPH increases in men with advancing age. While transurethral resection of the prostate gland entails complications such as retrograde ejaculation, urinary incontinence, hematuria, urethral strictures, bladder neck sclerosis, and other adverse events, it is necessary to apply minimally invasive surgical methods such as superselective embolization of the prostatic arteries (PAE), particularly Proximal Embolization First Then Distal Embolization (PErFecTED). The data from 1,015 BPH patients who underwent endovascular surgery demonstrate the benefits of PErFecTED treatment during 24 months after surgery. Both Quality of Life score and International Prostate Symptom Score were around three times better in the PErFecTED group and remained stable during the entire observation period. However, the technique needs to be improved due to the high risk of postembolization syndrome.

Prostatic Artery Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a noncancerous enlargement of the prostate that commonly affects older people with prostates and may lead to obstructive urinary symptoms. Symptoms may initially be mild but tend to worsen over time. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is an endovascular procedure to treat BPH, wherein an interventional radiologist inserts a catheter into the patient to inject tiny particles intended to reduce blood flow to the enlarged prostate, causing it to shrink in size. We conducted a health technology assessment on PAE for people with BPH, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding PAE, and patient preferences and values.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for observational studies. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic review of the economic literature. We then assessed the cost-effectiveness of PAE compared with alternative treatments (i.e., transurethral resection of the prostate [TURP] or open simple prostatectomy [OSP]) using a Markov microsimulation model. The analysis was conducted from the Ontario Ministry of Health perspective over a time horizon of 6.5 years. We also analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding PAE in people with moderate to severe BPH in Ontario.

RESULTS

We included six studies in our systematic review. Four RCTs and one observational study compared PAE with TURP, and one observational study compared PAE with OSP. All studies had considerable risk-of-bias concerns. PAE may improve BPH symptoms and urodynamic measures, but we are uncertain whether PAE achieves better results than TURP (GRADE: Very low to Low). Compared with TURP, PAE may result in higher patient satisfaction and fewer adverse events (GRADE: Not assessed). Compared with OSP, PAE may result in smaller improvements in BPH symptoms and urodynamic measures and may lead to fewer adverse events, but the evidence is very uncertain (GRADE: Very low).We did not find any published cost-effectiveness studies in the economic literature review. Our primary economic evaluation showed that, compared with TURP, PAE has an incremental cost of $328 (95% CrI: -$686 to $1,423) and a very small incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 0.007 (95% CrI: -0.004 to 0.018). The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PAE versus TURP is $44,930 per QALY gained. At the commonly used willingness-to-pay values of $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY, the cost-effectiveness of PAE is uncertain (52% and 68% probability, respectively, of being cost-effective compared with TURP). In a scenario analysis, we compared PAE with OSP for individuals with large prostates (who may be ineligible for TURP). We found that PAE is less costly (-$1,231; 95% CrI: -$2,457 to $69) and less effective (-0.12 QALYs; 95% CrI: -0.18 to -0.04). The resulting ICER of PAE versus OSP is $10,241 saved per QALY lost. At the commonly used willingness-to-pay value of $50,000 per QALY, PAE is unlikely to be cost-effective (2% probability of being cost-effective compared with OSP). Assuming a low uptake (i.e., an additional 10 to 50 procedures per year in years 1 to 5), we estimated that publicly funding PAE in Ontario would lead to an additional cost of about $11,400 over the next 5 years.People we spoke with who have lived experience with BPH reported on the negative impact it can have on their quality of life. Those who had received PAE reported a positive experience with the procedure and meaningful improvement in their symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostatic artery embolization may improve BPH symptoms and urodynamic measures, but we are uncertain if the procedure results in similar outcomes to those of TURP. Based on one observational study, PAE may result in smaller improvements compared with OSP, but we are very uncertain of the evidence. Compared with TURP and OSP, PAE may result in fewer adverse events. Longer-term comparative studies are needed to assess the durability and long-term adverse events of PAE, the potential need for reintervention after PAE, and how PAE compares with other available BPH treatment options.We found the cost-effectiveness of PAE compared with TURP to be uncertain. Also, PAE is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with OSP. If PAE is publicly funded in Ontario, the budget impact is estimated to be small over the next 5 years.People who have lived experience with BPH reported that PAE improves quality of life and reduces negative symptoms of BPH.

Using prostate contrast retention (PCR) as the procedural endpoint in prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVES

The failure rate following prostate artery embolization (PAE) is around 20%, which may in part result from inadequate embolization. Prostate contrast retention (PCR) adequacy on immediate post-embolization cone-beam CT may provide better assessment of embolization completeness than arterial contrast stasis seen on fluoroscopy alone. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of PAE using PCR adequacy as the procedural endpoint.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of all PAE cases using this technique at a single large volume center was conducted. Following initial embolization of the main prostatic arteries, if PCR was inadequate, additional embolization was performed. Technical success (adequate PCR) was defined as > 75% global prostate gland contrast staining. Clinical success was determined in accordance to CIRSE standards of practice.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-five patients (mean age 68 ± 8.4 years) underwent PAE from June 2017 to March 2019. Technical and clinical success rates were 98.8% and 96.4% respectively. Clinical success rate was significantly higher in patients with adequate PCR. International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSS) and Quality of Life (QoL) scores significantly improved at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up when compared to baseline. Prostate volume (PV) and post-voiding residual bladder volume were significantly reduced at 3, 6, and 12 months in comparison to baseline. Mild (Clavien-Dindo grade I/II) and moderate (grade III) complication rates were 12.1% and 3.6% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

By using PCR adequacy as a guide to determine the procedure endpoint for PAE, it may be possible to achieve more complete embolization and thus higher clinical success rates.

KEY POINTS

• By using PCR adequacy as a guide to determine the procedure endpoint for PAE, it may be possible to achieve more complete embolization and thus higher clinical success rates.

Perioperative Blood Loss after Preoperative Prostatic Artery Embolization in Patients Undergoing Simple Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score‒Matched Study

PURPOSE

To assess perioperative blood loss following prostatic artery embolization (PAE) before surgery in patients undergoing simple prostatectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was used to identify 63 patients (mean age, 65.3 ± 8.0 years) with prostatic hypertrophy and severe lower urinary tract symptoms who underwent prostatectomy from September 2014 to December 2019, 18 (28.5%) of whom underwent PAE before surgery. Demographic data, pertinent laboratory results, procedural or operative information, hospital course details, and pathology reports were obtained. A 2:1 propensity score‒matching analysis was performed to compare intraoperative blood loss in patients who underwent prostatectomy alone with intraoperative blood loss in those who first underwent bilateral PAE before surgery.

RESULTS

Sixteen (89%) of the 18 patients underwent bilateral PAE before surgery. Thirty-two patients who underwent prostatectomy without embolization before surgery were selected for the 2:1 propensity score‒matched analysis based on age, race, surgery type, prostate gland size, and comorbidities. The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) for prostatectomy alone was 545 ± 380 mL (mean ± standard deviation). There was a statistically significant reduction in the EBL for patients who underwent bilateral PAE (303 ± 227 mL, P < .01). The operative time was also significantly decreased for patients who underwent PAE before surgery (P < .05). For patients who underwent PAE, there were no complications related to the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral PAE before surgery appears to be safe and may be effective in reducing perioperative bleeding and operative time.

Effect of hospital, community and home care model on nursing and quality of life of patients after transurethral resection of benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of hospital, community and home care model on the nursing effect and quality of life of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) undergoing transurethral resection.

METHODS

As a prospective study, 89 patients with transurethral resection of BPH were randomly divided into two groups by different nursing methods: a research group and a control group. The control group (n=41) received regular nursing, and the research group (n=48) received hospital, community and home care intervention. Both nursing methods were performed from patients' admission to discharge. The changes of psychological status (measured by Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD)), self-care ability (measured by Exercise of Self-care Agency Scale (ESCA)) and quality of life (measured by Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Quality of Life Scale (BPH-QLS)), the incidence of postoperative complications and nursing satisfaction of patients before and after intervention were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

After nursing, the HAMA and HAMD scores in the research group were lower than those in the control group; the ESCA score and BPH-QLS score were higher than those in the control group (P<0.05); the incidence of complications in the research group was lower than that in the control group (P<0.05); the nursing satisfaction in the research group was higher than that in the control group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The intervention of hospital, community and family care nursing model for patients with transurethral resection of BPH can reduce the occurrence of complications, significantly improve their psychological status and self-care ability, thus improving the quality of life and nursing satisfaction of patients.

Interpreting and Appraising Noninferiority Trials: A Guide for Urologists and Clinicians

Noninferiority trials are increasingly used in urology. Understanding the methodology and assessment of such trials can be challenging for clinicians. We provide an approach to interpreting the results, validity, and applicability of noninferiority studies in clinical practice.

A Proof-of-Concept Study on the Use of Prostate Artery Embolization Before Definitive Radiation Therapy in Prostate Cancer

Purpose

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is an effective therapy for alleviating lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia; however, is not well studied in patients with concurrent prostate cancer (PCa). We demonstrate a proof of concept for PAE before definitive radiation therapy (RT) in patients with PCa.

Methods and Materials

From December 2017 to July 2019, 9 patients with PCa underwent PAE for the indication of LUTS from benign prostatic hyperplasia with concurrent PCa. Five received radiation and all follow-ups at our institution and were therefore included in the analysis. Median follow-up was 18 months from the time of PAE. Side effects during radiation were quantified using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scoring system. Pre- and post-PAE plans were compared in the 5 patients by performing an isovolumetric expansion of the post-PAE plan (treated plan) equivalent to the measured volume reduction after PAE. Patient 1 (PT-01) and PT-02 had prostate RT alone whereas PT-03, PT-04, and PT-05 had prostate with elective nodal coverage RT. Mean doses to organs at risk were compared between the 2 plans.

Results

The mean International Prostate Symptom Score reduction after PAE was 13.8 (5.0-30.0; P = .02). The mean prostatic volume reduction after PAE was 23.1% (7.2%-47.7%). There were no Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 (severe) or higher during radiation. Post-PAE plans in PT-01 and PT-02 had on average 23.2%, 39.8%, and 22.9% decrease in mean dose across the bladder, rectum, and penile bulb, respectively, compared with the pre-PAE plans. There were no appreciable differences in dosimetry in PT03, PT-04, and PT-05 who had nodal coverage. There was no biochemical failure in any of the patients.

Conclusions

We demonstrate a proof of concept that PAE is a clinically significant adjunctive therapy for alleviating LUTS and achieving significant volume reduction before RT, resulting in decreased radiation-related toxicity from RT for PCa.

Limiting radiation exposure during prostatic arteries embolization: influence of patient characteristics, anatomical conditions, and technical factors

OBJECTIVE

To assess the influence of patient characteristics, anatomical conditions, and technical factors on radiation exposure during prostatic arteries embolization (PAE) performed for benign prostatic hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient characteristics (age, body mass index (BMI)), anatomical conditions (number of prostatic arteries, anastomosis), and technical factors (use of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), large display monitor (LDM), and magnification) were recorded as well as total air kerma (AK), dose area product (DAP), fluoroscopy time (FT), and number of acquisitions (NAcq). Associations between potential dose-influencing factors and AK using univariate analysis and a multiple linear regression model were assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-one consecutive men (68 ± 8 years, min-max: 40-76) were included. LDM and CBCT decreased the use of small field of view with 13.9 and 3.8% respectively, both p < 0.001. The use of a LDM significantly reduced AK (1006.6 ± 471.7 vs. 1412 ± 754.6 mGy, p = 0.02), DAP (119.4 ± 64.4 vs. 167.9 ± 99.2, p = 0.04), FT (40.4 ± 11.5 vs. 53.6 ± 25.5 min, p = 0.01), and NAcq (16.3 ± 6.3 vs. 18.2 ± 7, p = 0.04). In multivariate analysis, AK reduction was associated with lower patient BMI (β = 0.359, p = 0.002), shorter FT (β = 0.664, p < 0.001) and CBCT use (β = - 0.223, p = 0.03), and decreased NAcq (β = 0.229, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

LDM and CBCT are important technical dose-related factors to help reduce radiation exposure during PAE, and should be considered in standard practice.

KEY POINTS

• The use of large display monitor (LDM) and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) both decreased the need for magnification during prostatic arteries embolization (PAE). • The use of LDM reduces radiation exposure during PAE. • Total air kerma is associated with patient's body mass index, fluoroscopy time, CBCT, and the number of acquisitions.

Prostatic Artery Embolization: Influence of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography on Radiation Exposure, Procedure Time, and Contrast Media Use

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) on radiation exposure, procedure time, and contrast media (CM) use in prostatic artery embolization (PAE).

Materials and Methods

Seventy-eight patients were enrolled in this retrospective, single-center study. All patients received PAE without (group A; n = 39) or with (group B; n = 39) CBCT. Total dose-area product (DAP_total; Gycm²), total entrance skin dose (ESD_total; mGy), and total effective dose (ED_total; mSv) were primary outcomes. Number of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) series, CM use, fluoroscopy time, and procedure time were secondary outcomes. PAE in group A was performed by a single radiologist with 15 years experience, PAE in group B was conducted by four radiologists with 4 to 6 years experience.

Results

For groups A vs. B, respectively, median (IQR): DAP_total 236.94 (186.7) vs. 281.20 (214.47) Gycm²(p = 0.345); ED_total 25.82 (20.35) vs. 39.84 (23.75) mSv (p =  < 0.001); ESD_total 2833 (2278) vs. 2563 (3040) mGy(p = 0.818); number of DSA series 25 (15) vs. 23 (10)(p = 0.164); CM use 65 (30) vs. 114 (40) mL(p =  < 0.001); fluoroscopy time 23 (20) vs. 28 (25) min(p = 0.265), and procedure time 70 (40) vs.120 (40) min(p =  < 0.001). Bilateral PAE was achieved in 33/39 (84.6%) group A and 32/39 (82.05%) group B(p = 0.761), all other patients received unilateral PAE. There were no significant differences between clinical parameters and origins of the prostatic arteries (PA) (p = 0.206–1.00).

Conclusion

Operators with extensive expertise on PAE may not benefit from addition of CBCT to DSA runs, whereas for operators with less expertise, CBCT when used alongside with DSA runs increased the overall radiation exposure.