1
|
Gemma L, Pecoraro A, Sebastianelli A, Spatafora P, Sessa F, Nicoletti R, Gravas S, Campi R, Serni S, Gacci M. Impact of minimally invasive surgical procedures for Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia on ejaculatory function: a systematic review. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2024:10.1038/s41391-024-00795-2. [PMID: 38355729 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-024-00795-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/15/2023] [Revised: 01/10/2024] [Accepted: 01/16/2024] [Indexed: 02/16/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) are affected by potentially bothersome side effects on sexual, and, above all, ejaculatory function. Several minimally invasive techniques have been proposed in the last years in order to overcome these consequences. Our aim is to summarize and evaluate the efficacy on LUTS relieve and the impact on sexual/ejaculatory function of Rezum, prostate artery embolization (PAE), implantation of a prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and the temporary implantable nitinol device (TIND). METHODS A systematic review of the English-language literature was conducted using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases from January 2000 to October 2022, according to the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023466515). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective studies and non-comparative or comparative studies assessing the impact on functional and ejaculatory function after minimally invasive surgical therapies for Male LUTS were evaluated. Risk of bias assessment was performed according to the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for comparative studies, and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) for RCTs. RESULTS Overall, 47 studies were included (n = 4 for TIND; n = 9 for Rezum; n = 13 for PUL; n = 21 for PAE). Most studies relied on prospective patient cohorts and were rated as low risk of bias. Across studies assessing the efficacy of Rezum, a significant improvement in terms of IPSS (ranging from -47% to -56%) and Qmax (ranging from +39% to +87%) was reported. On the other hand, according to IIEF-5 score, Rezum had a minimal impact on sexual function (ranging from -1% to -3%). PUL showed a positive impact on IPSS (ranging from -35% to -58.2%) and Qmax (ranging from +49.9% to +114.7%) and sexual function. Finally, PAE showed encouraging functional results with IPSS score reducing from -12.8% to 63.3% and Qmax improving from +8% to 114.9% but the available evidence regarding the potential impact of PAE on sexual outcomes were limited. CONCLUSION Rezum, PAE, PUL and TIND are safe and feasible techniques associated with a significant functional improvement. While available data suggest a minimal impact of Rezum and PUL on ejaculatory function, the evidence after PAE and TIND are still limited. Therefore, our review lays the foundation for further research aiming to identify the criteria to select best candidates for uMIST to tailor the management in light of specific patient- and disease- factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Gemma
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Alessio Pecoraro
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Arcangelo Sebastianelli
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Pietro Spatafora
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Francesco Sessa
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Rossella Nicoletti
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Stavros Gravas
- Department of Urology, Medical School, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
| | - Riccardo Campi
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Sergio Serni
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy
| | - Mauro Gacci
- Department of Urological Minimally Invasive, Robotic Surgery and Kidney Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
- Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Vigneswaran G, Maclean D, Doshi N, Harris M, Bryant TJC, Hacking NC, Somani B, Modi S. Cardiovascular Comorbidities Do Not Impact Prostate Artery Embolisation (PAE) Outcomes: Retrospective Analysis of the National UK-ROPE Registry. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2024; 47:115-120. [PMID: 38012342 PMCID: PMC10770187 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-023-03608-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 11/29/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Prostate artery embolisation (PAE) is a key treatment for the management of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Common cardiovascular risk factors might be associated with suboptimal outcomes and thus influence patient treatment selection. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether cardiovascular comorbidities affect PAE outcomes. METHODS Retrospective subset analysis of the UK Registry of Prostate Artery Embolisation (UK-ROPE) database was performed with patients who had a full documented past medical histories including hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease (CAD), diabetes and smoking status as well as international prostate symptom score (IPSS) at baseline and at 12 months. Multiple regression was performed to assess for any significant predictors. RESULTS Comorbidity data were available for 100/216 patients (mean age 65.8 ± 6.4 years), baseline IPSS 20.9 ± 7.0). Regression analysis revealed that the presence of hypertension (53.7% IPSS reduction vs. absence 51.4%, p = 0.94), diabetes (52.6% vs. absence 52.1%, p = 0.6), CAD (59.2% vs. absence 51.4%, p = 0.95), no comorbidities (49.8% vs. any comorbidity present 55.3%, p = 0.66), smoking status (non-smoker, 52.6%, current smoker, 61.5%, ex-smoker, 49.8%, p > 0.05), age (p = 0.52) and baseline Qmax (p = 0.41) did not significantly impact IPSS reduction at 12 months post-PAE. Baseline prostate volume significantly influenced IPSS reduction (≥ 80 cc prostates, 58.9% vs. < 80 cc prostates 43.2%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION The presence of cardiovascular comorbidities/smoking history does not appear to significantly impact PAE symptom score outcomes at 12 months post procedure. Our findings suggest that if the prostatic artery can be accessed, then clinical success is comparable to those without cardiovascular comorbidities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ganesh Vigneswaran
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
- Cancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Drew Maclean
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Neel Doshi
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
- Cancer Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Mark Harris
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Timothy J C Bryant
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Nigel C Hacking
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Bhaskar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Sachin Modi
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sapoval M, Thiounn N, Descazeaud A, Déan C, Ruffion A, Pagnoux G, Duarte RC, Robert G, Petitpierre F, Karsenty G, Vidal V, Murez T, Vernhet-Kovacsik H, de la Taille A, Kobeiter H, Mathieu R, Heautot JF, Droupy S, Frandon J, Barry Delongchamps N, Korb-Savoldelli V, Durand-Zaleski I, Pereira H, Chatellier G. Prostatic artery embolisation versus medical treatment in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (PARTEM): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3, superiority trial. THE LANCET REGIONAL HEALTH. EUROPE 2023; 31:100672. [PMID: 37415648 PMCID: PMC10320610 DOI: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100672] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2023] [Revised: 06/06/2023] [Accepted: 06/07/2023] [Indexed: 07/08/2023]
Abstract
Background Prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) is a minimally invasive treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Our aim was to compare patient's symptoms improvement after PAE and medical treatment. Methods A randomised, open-label, superiority trial was set in 10 French hospitals. Patients with bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) defined by International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) > 11 and quality of life (QoL) > 3, and BPH ≥50 ml resistant to alpha-blocker monotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to PAE or Combined Therapy ([CT], oral dutasteride 0.5 mg/tamsulosin hydrochloride 0.4 mg per day). Randomisation was stratified by centre, IPSS and prostate volume with a minimisation procedure. The primary outcome was the 9-month IPSS change. Primary and safety analysis were done according to the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle among patients with an evaluable primary outcome. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02869971. Findings Ninety patients were randomised from September 2016 to February 2020, and 44 and 43 patients assessed for primary endpoint in PAE and CT groups, respectively. The 9-month change of IPSS was -10.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -11.8 to -8.3) and -5.7 (95% CI: -7.5 to -3.8) in the PAE and CT groups, respectively. This reduction was significantly greater in the PAE group than in the CT group (-4.4 [95% CI: -6.9 to -1.9], p = 0.0008). The IIEF-15 score change was 8.2 (95% CI: 2.9-13.5) and -2.8 (95% CI: -8.4 to 2.8) in the PAE and CT groups, respectively. No treatment-related AE or hospitalisation was noticed. After 9 months, 5 and 18 patients had invasive prostate re-treatment in the PAE and CT group, respectively. Interpretation In patients with BPH ≥50 ml and bothersome LUTS resistant to alpha-blocker monotherapy, PAE provides more urinary and sexual symptoms benefit than CT up to 24 months. Funding French Ministry of Health and a complementary grant from Merit Medical.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc Sapoval
- Université de Paris Cité, PARCC - INSERM Unité-970, Paris, France
- Department of Vascular and Oncological Interventional Radiology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Nicolas Thiounn
- Department of Urology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Aurélien Descazeaud
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, Department of Urology, Limoges, France
| | - Carole Déan
- Department of Vascular and Oncological Interventional Radiology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Alain Ruffion
- Department of Urology, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hôpital Lyon Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France
- Université Lyon 1, Faculté de médecine Lyon Sud, Equipe 2 - Centre d’Innovation en Cancérologie de Lyon (EA 3738 CICLY), Lyon, France
| | - Gaële Pagnoux
- Department of Uroradiology, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France
| | - Ricardo Codas Duarte
- Department of Urology and Transplantation, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Hôpital Edouard Herriot, Lyon, France
| | - Grégoire Robert
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Department of Urology, Université de Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
| | - Francois Petitpierre
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux, Department of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Imaging, Bordeaux, France
| | - Gilles Karsenty
- Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Hôpital de la Conception, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France
| | - Vincent Vidal
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de la Timone, Interventional Radiology Section, Department of Medical Imaging, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, Marseille, France
- Aix-Marseille Université, LiiE, CERIMED, Marseille, France
| | - Thibaut Murez
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier, Department of Urology and Renal Transplantation, Montpellier, France
| | - Hélène Vernhet-Kovacsik
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Hôpital Arnaud-de-Villeneuve, Montpellier, France
| | - Alexandre de la Taille
- Department of Urology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France
| | - Hicham Kobeiter
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Medical Imaging, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Université Paris Est, Créteil, France
| | - Romain Mathieu
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Department of Urology, Rennes, France
| | - Jean-Francois Heautot
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes, Vascular Medicine Unit, Department of Radiology, Hôpital Pontchaillou, Rennes, France
| | - Stéphane Droupy
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire De Nîmes, Department of Urology and Andrology, Université de Montpellier, Nîmes, France
| | - Julien Frandon
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire De Nîmes, Department of Medical Imaging, Université de Montpellier, Nîmes, France
- Medical Imaging Group Nîmes, IMAGINE, Nîmes, France
| | - Nicolas Barry Delongchamps
- Université de Paris Cité, Inserm Unit U1151, Paris, France
- Department of Urology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Cochin, Paris, France
| | - Virginie Korb-Savoldelli
- Department of Pharmacy, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Paris, France
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Université Paris-Saclay, Faculté de Pharmacie, Chatenay-Malabry, France
| | - Isabelle Durand-Zaleski
- Université de Paris Cité, CRESS, INSERM UMR1153, INRA, Paris, France
- Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital de l'Hôtel Dieu, Université Paris Est Créteil, URCEco, Paris, France
| | - Helena Pereira
- INSERM, Centre d'investigation Clinique 1418 Épidémiologie Clinique, Paris, France
- Clinical Research Unit, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Paris, France
| | - Gilles Chatellier
- INSERM, Centre d'investigation Clinique 1418 Épidémiologie Clinique, Paris, France
- Clinical Research Unit, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen Georges-Pompidou, Paris, France
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fu JX, Wang M, Duan F, Yan J, Wang Y, Yuan B, Ye H. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography in the identification of prostatic arterial anatomy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: prospective comparison with digital subtraction angiography. Clin Radiol 2023; 78:e169-e176. [PMID: 36650079 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2022.09.121] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2022] [Revised: 08/03/2022] [Accepted: 09/21/2022] [Indexed: 01/19/2023]
Abstract
AIM To evaluate the utility of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) for identifying prostatic artery (PA) anatomy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) before PA embolisation (PAE), using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 176 patients underwent pelvic CE-MRA at 3 T. DSA was performed within the following 7 days. Two interventional radiologists compared the CE-MRA findings with DSA findings to assess the anatomy of the PAs. The rates of correct identification of the origins and collaterals of the PAs by CE-MRA were calculated. The utility for predicting the optimal X-ray tube angle obliquity for visualising the origins of the PAs by CE-MRA was evaluated. An exact McNemar's test was used to compare the detection rates of the PAs and the collaterals with DSA versus CE-MRA. A two-sided p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS Of the 376 PAs identified by DSA, CE-MRA correctly identified the origins of 369 vessels (98.1%), with a 1.9% false-negative rate and no false-positive results. Of the 57 total collaterals identified by DSA, CE-MRA identified 50 vessels correctly (87.7%), with a 12.3% false-negative rate and no false-positive results. No significant differences were observed between CE-MRA and DSA in the identification of the PA origins (p=0.824) and the collaterals (p=0.327). The optimal degree for an oblique projection to visualise the origins of the PAs could be predicted accurately (100%) by pre-procedural CE-MRA. CONCLUSION CE-MRA before PAE can reliably predict the PA anatomy and facilitate procedural planning.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J X Fu
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China
| | - M Wang
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China.
| | - F Duan
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China
| | - J Yan
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China
| | - Y Wang
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China
| | - B Yuan
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China
| | - H Ye
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing 100853, PR China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Wang MQ, Zhang JL, Duan F, Yuan B, Xin H, Fu JX, Ye HY, Yu HK, Feng DP, Cheng K, Zhang XJ. Prostate arterial chemoembolization for treatment of refractory hematuria and urinary retention in patients with localized advanced prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2023; 26:88-95. [PMID: 35249108 DOI: 10.1038/s41391-022-00516-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2021] [Revised: 02/03/2022] [Accepted: 02/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the safety and efficacy transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the treatment of refractory gross hematuria (RGH) and urinary retention (UR) secondary to localized advanced prostate cancer (PCa). PATIENTS AND METHODS Thirty-two patients (mean age 72.5 years, range 60-89) with advanced PCa-related RGH that failed conventional therapy were included. Twenty-two of these patients had catheter-dependent due to PCa-related UR. TACE was performed with epirubicin (EPI)-eluting HepaSpheres (HS) plus intra-arterial (IA) infusion of docetaxel. Technical success, adverse events (AEs), overall survival (OS), control of RGH, removal of indwelling catheters, and local disease control, were evaluated. RESULTS Technical success was achieved in 100% without major AEs. Mean follow up post-TACE was 27 months (range 8-56 months) with a mean OS of 30 months. GRH stopped within 5 days after TACE in all patients, 26 (86.7%) of these patients exhibited good bleeding control during a mean follow-up of 24 months; 17 (77.3%) of the 22 patients with UR had recovered spontaneous urination, 15 (88.2%) patients were catheter-free at their last follow-up with a mean of 24 months. BS was obtained in 73.3% (22/30) of patients at a mean follow-up of 29 months. At the last visit, 22 patients had a mean of 36 months follow-up and the mean percentage reduction in prostate volume was 55.5%, with a statistically different from baseline (P = 0.022). Negative biopsy results were obtained in 84.2% (16/19) of the patients at 12-47 months after TACE. Compared with baseline values, there was a significant improvements in IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and PVR (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS TACE using EPI-eluting HS plus IA infusion of docetaxel is a safe and effective treatment option for the advanced PCa patients with GRH and UR, and it could be considered as an alternative if there was no other therapeutic choice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mao Qiang Wang
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China.
| | - Jin Long Zhang
- Department of Radiology, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100730, PR China
| | - Feng Duan
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China
| | - Bing Yuan
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China
| | - Hainan Xin
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China
| | - Jin Xin Fu
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China
| | - Hui Yi Ye
- Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China
| | - Hong Kai Yu
- Department of Urology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, 100853, P. R. China
| | - Dui-Ping Feng
- Department of Oncology and Vascular Intervention, The First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, 030001, China
| | - Kai Cheng
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Qingdao, 266071, China
| | - Xiu Jun Zhang
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Tianjin Nankai Hospital, Tianjin, 300193, China
| |
Collapse
|