Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Prostatic Arterial Embolization versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate—A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Clinical Trial

Comparing embolic particles for prostatic artery embolization to treat lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia

PURPOSE

Compare the safety and efficacy of polyvinyl alcohol particles (PVA) versus trisacryl gelatin microspheres (Embospheres) versus hydrogel microspheres coated with polyzene-F (Embozenes) for prostatic artery embolization (PAE) to treat patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center prospective cohort study from 2019 to 2023, including patients with international prostate symptom score (IPSS) ≥ 15 and/or quality of life score (QoL) ≥ 4. Allocation to embolic agents was performed chronologically: 100-300 µm PVA (n = 53), followed by 300-500 µm Embospheres (n = 50), and finally, 400 µm Embozenes (n = 50). All patients were evaluated at baseline and at 1 and 6 months after PAE with IPSS/QoL; peak urinary flow rate, post-void residual volume, and prostate volume with ultrasound and prostate-specific antigen. Adverse events and the need for prostatic re-interventions were assessed.

RESULTS

There were no significant baseline differences between the three groups except for patient age (62.5 years PVA; 66.1 years Embospheres and 66.6 years Embozenes; p = 0.019). There were no major adverse events and no differences between groups regarding minor adverse events. All outcome measures improved significantly from baseline, with no significant differences between groups. Mean ± standard deviation IPSS/QoL improvement at 6 months: -10.7 ± 7.9/-2.2 ± 1.7 PVA; -10.4 ± 7.3/-2.0 ± 1.5 Embospheres; -10.4 ± 7.0/-2.2 ± 1.6 Embozenes (p = 0.987). Re-intervention rates after 6 months: 9% (n = 5/53) PVA; 14% (n = 7/50) Embospheres; 8% (n = 4/50) Embozenes (p = 0.591).

CONCLUSIONS

PAE with PVA particles, Embospheres, and Embozenes is equally safe and effective in treating BPH-related lower urinary tract symptoms.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This is the first prospective study showing equivalence between the most frequently used embolic agents for prostatic artery embolization.

KEY POINTS

Different particles can be used interchangeably for prostatic artery embolization. The improvements in measured metrics were the same between groups, with no differences in adverse events. The need for prostatic medication and re-intervention rates were the same at 1 and 6 months after embolization.

Transurethral resection of the prostate across continents: a meta-analysis evaluating quality of gold standard in the twenty-first century

PURPOSE

To compare outcomes of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) across different regions worldwide over the past two decades.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials indexed to PubMed that assessed TURP. A total of 102 studies with 8,454 patients were included and grouped by continents: Europe, Asia, Africa, and Others (North America, South America, and Australia). International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak flow (Qmax), postvoid residual urine (PVR), PSA levels, prostate volume, and Sexual Health Inventory for Men scores (at 3, 12, and 36 months) were assessed, along with postoperative complications. Heterogeneity across studies was classified as low (I2 < 25%), moderate (I2 = 25-75%), or high (I2 > 75%).

RESULTS

TURP consistently exhibited significant enhancements in IPSS, Qmax, and PVR across various regions. Notably, PVR demonstrated high heterogeneity (I²=100%). TURP presented low complication rates with TURP syndrome (2%), bleeding (8%), and blood transfusion (6%). However, significant heterogeneity was observed, particularly for clot evacuation (I2 = 87%), irritative symptoms (I2 = 96%), and incontinence (I2 = 84%). The retreatment rates at 1 and 3 years were 5% and 7%, respectively, with significant differences across regions.

CONCLUSION

Global outcomes of TURP lack a discernible trend. The substantial heterogeneity observed among continents suggests a lack of standardization. Nevertheless, uniform symptomatic improvements among patients still support TURP as the gold-standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia, despite variations in its results worldwide.

Long-term Efficacy of Prostatic Artery Embolization Alone Versus Prostatic Artery Embolization Followed by HoLEP for Large (> 80 cm3) Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the long-term efficacy of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with PAE followed by holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in patients with large prostatic volume (PV>80 cm3), and to identify the appropriate population for PAE+HoLEP.

METHODS

From March 2015 to December 2023, 208 consecutive BPH patients were enrolled into two groups: PAE monotherapy (Group A, n=168) and PAE followed by HoLEP (Group B, n=40). Differences in clinical and functional parameters between baseline and each follow-up point were compared. Cumulative clinical success rates were assessed. Predictors of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) recurrence were analyzed using ROC analyses and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

The median follow-up times in Group A and B were 36 and 48 months. Both groups showed significant improvements in clinical and functional parameters at each follow-up period compared to baseline (P<0.01). Cumulative clinical success rates in Group A were 95.3%, 91.6%, 80.6%, 68.0%, and 47.9%, compared to 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 85.7% in Group B at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years. Unilateral PAE and PV≥150.3 cm3 were independent predictors of LUTS recurrence in Group A (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

PAE monotherapy and combination PAE+HoLEP were effective options for patients with large PV, but the LUTS recurrence rate of PAE increased over time. Unilateral PAE was a significant factor for recurrence. Patients with PV≥150.3 cm3 could be good candidates for a combined approach.

The 'Prostate Embolisation AS first-line therapY compAred to meDication in treatment naïVe men with prostAte eNlargement, a randomised ControllEd trial' (P-EASY ADVANCE): a randomised controlled trial of prostate embolisation vs medication for BPH

OBJECTIVE

To compare prostate artery embolisation (PAE) to the combination of tamsulosin and dutasteride therapy as a potential first-line therapy for obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in treatment-naïve patients in the 'Prostate Embolisation AS first-line therapY compAred to meDication in treatment naïVe men with prostAte eNlargement, a randomised ControllEd trial' (P-EASY ADVANCE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 39 men with enlarged prostates, moderate-severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and obstructed/equivocal urodynamic studies (UDS), and who had no prior treatment for BPH, were randomised to receive either combined medical therapy with tamsulosin and dutasteride (medication) or PAE. Follow-up UDS, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), uroflowmetry and ultrasound were performed at short- to medium-term intervals following interventions and compared to baseline.

RESULTS

The medication and PAE treatment groups had similar baseline characteristics, including prostate volumes (87.8 and 85.4 mL respectively), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax; 6.5 and 6.6 mL/s, respectively), IPSS (19.5 and 21, respectively) and obstructed UDS (79% and 74%, respectively). Both interventions improved voiding and bladder outflow obstruction from baseline, with more patients unobstructed after PAE (63%) compared to medication (28%) (P = 0.03). PAE patients had significantly greater reductions in prostate size (P < 0.001), incomplete emptying (P = 0.002), total IPSS (P = 0.032), Qmax (P = 0.006) and quality of life (P = 0.001). Altered ejaculation, erectile dysfunction and nausea were more common in the medication group.

CONCLUSION

Prostate artery embolisation was more effective than combined medical therapy at reducing urinary obstruction, decreasing prostate volume and improving LUTS in patients with BPH who had not previously been treated. This is the first randomised control study to compare PAE and combined medical therapy in exclusively treatment-naïve patients and raises the potential of PAE as an alternative early treatment option for BPH. Further randomised comparative trials are planned to further validate the role of PAE in mitigating obstructive BPH.

Evaluating transurethral resection of the prostate over twenty years: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

The goal of this systematic review is to assess the temporal changes in outcomes and complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) from 2000 to 2022.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 103 randomized clinical trials from PubMed on TURP, involving 8521 patients. Studies were grouped by years: 2000-2004, 2005-2009, 2010-2014, and 2015-2022. We assessed International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Peak Flow (Qmax), Post-void residue of urine (PVR), and post-operative complications. Heterogeneity was ranked as low (I2 < 25%), moderate (I2 = 25-75%), or high (I2 > 75%).

RESULTS

TURP significantly improved IPSS, Qmax, and PVR, with the most recent studies showing superior results in IPSS and Qmax after 3 years compared to 2000-2004 studies. Heterogeneity in PVR was high (I2 = 100%). No negative impact on erectile function was observed. Complication rates included TURP syndrome (2%), bleeding (8%), and blood transfusion (6%), but elevated heterogeneity with difference between the groups was seen in clot evacuation (I2 = 83%) and urinary tract infections (I2 = 82%). Other complications were urinary retention (4%), incontinence (8%), urethral stricture (3%), bladder neck stenosis (2%).

CONCLUSION

In the last 20 years there has not been a clear trend in the results of TURP. The found heterogeneity may indicate a lack of standardization in TURP procedures. However, symptomatic improvement among patients is uniform, which supports this procedure as a historical benchmark surgical treatment for BPH.

Two-Year Outcomes of Prostatic Artery Embolization for Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: An International, Multicenter, Prospective Study

PURPOSE

To describe clinical outcomes among patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) 24 months following prostatic artery embolization (PAE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an international, multicenter, prospective trial of males with BPH with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or acute urinary retention (AUR) treated with PAE. The primary outcome was the 12 month change in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) for patients referred for bothersome LUTS, or urinary catheter independence for patients treated for AUR. Secondary outcome measures included changes in IPSS at 3 and 24 months, changes in quality of life (QoL), changes in the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) questionnaire, technical success rate, and adverse events (AEs). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy-eight consecutive patients underwent PAE (bothersome LUTS: N = 405; AUR: N = 73), mean age was 70 years. For patients treated for bothersome LUTS, mean total IPSS at baseline was 21.8 and decreased to 9.3, 10.6, and 11.2 at 3, 12, and 24 months following PAE, respectively (all p < 0.001); QoL at baseline was 4.7 and decreased to 2.0, 2.1, and 2.3 at 3, 12, and 24 months, respectively (all p < 0.001). The mean SHIM score at baseline and 12 months following PAE was 13.8 and 13.9, respectively. Of the 73 patients treated for AUR, 48 (65.8%) had their indwelling catheter removed within 3 months of PAE and remained catheter free at 24 months. Fifty-five patients (11.5%) experienced ≥ 1 AE and 10 (2.1%) experienced a serious AE.

CONCLUSION

PAE is a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic BPH and LUTS. Level of Evidence Level 3 Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03527589.

Absence of Race/Ethnicity Reporting in Clinical Trials of True Minimally Invasive Surgical Therapies for the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent of racial reporting and enrollment in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for the office-based treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted for RCTs assessing 6 office-based MISTs: transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT), prostatic artery embolization, prostatic urethral lift, temporary implantable nitinol device, water vapor thermal therapy, and Optilume. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched up to November 3, 2023. Publications were excluded if they (1) did not address one of the aforementioned office-based MISTs for the treatment of BPH; (2) were not RCTs; (3) were an abstract or conference proceeding; or (4) were not published in English. In addition to study characteristics, data about racial reporting were collected. Two independent reviewers completed screening at title, abstract, and full-text levels, with conflicts resolved by consensus with a third reviewer.

RESULTS

A total of 61 publications representing 37 unique RCTs (n = 4027 unique patients) were reviewed, with publication years spanning from 1993 to 2023. TUMT was the most frequently studied MIST. Most publications (79%) were based solely in Europe or North America. Over 50% of the publications were multicenter trials. None of the included publications reported on race/ethnicity of study participants.

CONCLUSION

None of the 61 included publications of RCTs of office-based MISTs provided information on racial/ethnic composition of study participants. There is a staggering gap in the standardization of race/ethnicity reporting and enrollment within RCTs of MISTs. More granular data on race/ethnicity allow for better generalizability and equity.

Non-inferiority, randomised, open-label clinical trial on the effectiveness of transurethral microwave thermotherapy compared to prostatic artery embolisation in reducing severe lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: study protocol for the TUMT-PAE-1 trial

BACKGROUND

One-fourth of men older than 70 years have lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) that impair their quality of life. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered the gold standard for surgical treatment of LUTS caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) that cannot be managed conservatively or pharmacologically. However, TURP is only an option for patients fit for surgery and can result in complications. Transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) and prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) are alternative minimally invasive surgical therapies (MISTs) performed in an outpatient setting. Both treatments have shown to reduce LUTS with a similar post-procedure outcome in mean International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). It is however still unknown if TUMT and PAE perform equally well as they have never been directly compared in a randomised clinical trial. The objective of this clinical trial is to assess if PAE is non-inferior to TUMT in reducing LUTS secondary to BPH.

METHODS

This study is designed as a multicentre, non-inferiority, open-label randomised clinical trial. Patients will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation ratio between treatments. The primary outcome is the IPSS of the two arms after 6 months. The primary outcome will be evaluated using a 95% confidence interval against the predefined non-inferiority margin of + 3 points in IPSS. Secondary objectives include the comparison of patient-reported and functional outcomes at short- and long-term follow-up. We will follow the patients for 5 years to track long-term effect. Assuming a difference in mean IPSS after treatment of 1 point with an SD of 5 and a non-inferiority margin set at the threshold for a clinically non-meaningful difference of + 3 points, the calculated sample size was 100 patients per arm. To compensate for 10% dropout, the study will include 223 patients.

DISCUSSION

In this first randomised clinical trial to compare two MISTs, we expect non-inferiority of PAE to TUMT. The most prominent problems with MIST BPH treatments are the unknown long-term effect and the lack of proper selection of candidates for a specific procedure. With analysis of the secondary outcomes, we aspire to contribute to a better understanding of durability and provide knowledge to guide treatment decisions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05686525. Registered on January 17, 2023, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05686525 .

Impact of minimally invasive surgical procedures for Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia on ejaculatory function: a systematic review

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.

Prostatic Artery Embolisation Versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: 5-year Outcomes of a Randomised, Open-label, Noninferiority Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) are two of the surgical options for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO). Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of PAE and TURP for LUTS/BPO treatment at long-term follow-up.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised, open-label, single-centre trial at a Swiss tertiary care centre. The main outcome was the change in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) after PAE versus TURP. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes, functional measures, and adverse events assessed at baseline and at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 60 mo. Between-group differences in the change from baseline to 5 yr were tested using two-sided Mann-Whitney and t tests.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Of the 103 patients with refractory LUTS/BPO who were randomised between 2014 and 2017, 18/48 who underwent PAE and 38/51 who underwent TURP reached the 60-mo follow-up visit. The mean reduction in IPSS from baseline to 5 yr was -7.78 points after PAE and -11.57 points after TURP (difference 3.79 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.66 to 8.24; p = 0.092). TURP was superior for most patient-reported secondary outcomes except for erectile function. At 5 yr, PAE was less effective than TURP regarding objective parameters, such as the improvement in maximum urinary flow rate (3.59 vs 9.30 ml/s, difference -5.71, 95% CI -10.72 to -0.70; p = 0. 027) and reduction in postvoid residual volume (27.81 vs 219.97 ml; difference 192.15, 95% CI 83.79-300.51; p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The improvement in LUTS/BPO at 5 yr after PAE was inferior to that achieved with TURP. The limitations of PAE should be considered during patient selection and counselling.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this study, we show the long-term results of prostate artery embolisation (PAE) in comparison to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of benign prostate enlargement causing urinary symptoms. PAE shows good long-term results in properly selected patients, although the improvements are less pronounced than with TURP. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02054013.

Cost Comparison of Prostatic Artery Embolization Between In-Hospital and Outpatient-Based Lab Settings

Purpose This study aimed to determine the costs associated with prostatic artery embolization (PAE) performed in hospital and outpatient-based lab (OBL) settings. Methods Procedures were performed in similarly equipped procedure suites located within a tertiary hospital or OBL. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) was utilized to calculate procedural costs incurred by the institution. Process maps were created describing personnel, space, equipment, and materials. The time duration of each procedural step was recorded independently by a nurse caring for the patient at the time of the procedure, and mean values were included in our model. Using institutional and publicly available financial data, costs, and capacity cost rates were determined. Results Thirty-seven PAE procedures met inclusion criteria with a mean patient age of 70.4 (+/- 6.7) years and a mean prostate gland size of 129.7 (+/-56.4) cc. Twenty-six procedures were performed within the hospital setting, and 11 procedures were performed within the OBL. Reduction in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was not significantly different following hospital and OBL procedures (57.2% vs. 82.4%, P = 0.0796). Mean procedural time was not significantly different between the hospital and OBL settings (136.6 vs. 147.3 minutes, P = 0.1893). However, the duration between admission and discharge was significantly longer for procedures performed in a hospital (468.8 vs. 325.4 minutes, P <0.0001). Total costs for hospital-based procedures were marginally higher ($3,858.28 vs. $3,642.67). Conclusion Total PAE cost was similar between the hospital and OBL settings. However, longer periprocedural times for hospital-based procedures and differences in reimbursement may favor the performance of PAE in an OBL setting.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of re-intervention rates of new surgical interventions for benign prostatic hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the re-intervention rates of new surgical benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) interventions, as the clinical durability of new surgical interventions for BPH is not widely known.

METHODS

A critical review of new surgical BPH therapies namely 'UroLift®', 'Aquablation', 'Rezum', 'prostatic artery embolisation (PAE)' and 'temporary implantable nitinol device (iTIND)' was performed on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases between May 2010 and December 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. All relevant articles were reviewed, and the risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk assessment tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Of the 32 studies included, there were 10 randomised controlled trials and 22 prospective observational cohorts. A total of 2400 participants were studied with a median patient age of 66 years, a median prostate volume of 51.9 mL, and a median International Prostate Symptom Score of 22. The lowest re-intervention rate at 12 months was for Aquablation at 0.01%, followed by Rezum at 0.02%, iTIND at 0.03%, and PAE at 0.05%. Network meta-analysis (NMA) showed that the best-ranked treatment at 12 months was transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), followed by Aquablation, iTIND, Rezum, and UroLift. Re-intervention rates with these new BPH interventions are comparable, although some interventions reported better outcomes than TURP in the shorter term.

CONCLUSIONS

While this systematic review and NMA showed that the re-intervention rate with these new surgical BPH interventions appears to be comparable to TURP in the short term, further studies are required to directly compare these various BPH procedures.

Prostate volume: does it predict patient outcomes following prostate artery embolisation? A retrospective cohort study

Prostate artery embolisation (PAE) is a minimally invasive procedure commonly performed to treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) is a validated patient questionnaire quantifying LUTS and is used for patient selection for PAE, but it is largely subjective. Prostate volume is an easily estimated objective parameter across multiple imaging modalities. No strict threshold of prostate volume is established as a selection criterion for PAE, but it is generally accepted that prostate volume should be over 40 to 50 mL.We looked at a sample of 65 cases performed at a large teaching hospital between 2017 and 2019 with a minimum of four years follow up. Embospheres between 100 to 500 microns were injected into the prostatic arteries bilaterally (if technically feasible). A 'bullet shape' model was used to estimate prostatic volume from initial CT. N = 13 had an estimated volume < 51 mL (range 31-50 mL). IPSS before and at 3 months post-procedure were collected.80% of patients indicated a beneficial response to PAE (IPSS improvement > 5). 23% of patients required further PAE procedure or surgery. No major complications were recorded. The mean change in IPSS under 51 mL compared to over 51 mL cohort was 10.2 versus 11 (standard deviation 7.5 versus 7.3) (p = 0.44, 2 tailed Student's T-test).There was no statistically significant difference in the IPSS improvement or outcome of small volume prostates under 51 mL compared to large volume. Our results suggest that prostate volume should not be used to exclude patients for PAE.

[Minimally-Invasive Surgical Techniques (MIST): Shedding Light on the Mist]

As life expectancy increases and there is growing demand for BPH treatments, innovative technologies have been developed, allowing for swift recovery, symptom relief, low complication rates, and the possibility of performing procedures on an outpatient basis, often under local anaesthesia. This review aims to describe the outcomes of newly developed minimally-invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for BPH treatment in terms of functional voiding parameters and sexual function. These therapies are categorized into primarily ablative (Aquablation [Aquabeam]), non-ablative (Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL, Urolift), temporary implantable devices [iTind]), and secondarily ablative procedures (convective water vapor ablation, Rezum, Prostate Artery Embolization [PAE]). All MIST technologies have advanced the medical care of patients with BPH while preserving ejaculation. However, there is a shortage of long-term data specifically addressing re-intervention rates and the preservation of functional voiding parameters. Although there is promising data from regulatory trials and randomized studies, all MIST therapies are potentially associated with severe complications. Patients considering such methods must be thoroughly informed about their inferiority compared with established transurethral procedures like TUR-P and enucleation.

Prostate Artery Embolization as Minimally Invasive Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: An Updated Systematic Review

Background/Objectives: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has a significant impact on the quality of life of symptomatic patients. In patients manifesting lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) has become a topic of interest in recent years. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze and review techniques and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent endovascular treatment of BPH, with a special focus on the comparison of surgical and endovascular procedures. Methods: Through the major scientific databases, 1225 articles were selected from the initial research utilizing specific keywords and medical subject headings. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria established for selecting relevant studies for our purposes, the systematic analysis of the literature was conducted on a total of seven articles. Results: We collected data on 718 male patients (408 patients underwent PAE and 310 received TURP). The technical success rate varied from 86% to 100% for TAE and was 100% for TURP. During a 12-month follow-up period, both PAE and TURP were comparable on the reduction in IPSS and QoL questionnaire, while TURP showed significant improvements in Qmax and in the reduction in prostate volume. Length and cost of hospitalization were lower for PAE. Complication and adverse events rates were higher in the TURP group rather than in the PAE group (60.6% vs. 35.5%). Conclusions: Prostatic artery embolization represents an emerging minimally invasive procedure for BPH. According to previously released clinical studies, quality-of-life and urological symptom scores of the PAE group were comparable to those of the TURP group. Our research strengthens the evidence supporting the effectiveness and safety of PAE as a therapy for LUTS related to BPH.

Safety of Prostatic Artery Embolization via Transradial Access versus Transfemoral Access

PURPOSE

To compare prostatic artery embolization (PAE) via transradial access (TRA-PAE) versus transfemoral access (TFA-PAE) to assist access selection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Procedural outcomes and adverse events were evaluated in 998 patients who underwent PAE at a single center from April 2014 to August 2022; 821 (82%) underwent TRA-PAE (Group R) and 177 (18%) underwent TFA-PAE (Group F). Mean age and prostate size of Groups R and F were 69.2 years (SD ± 8.4) and 117.4 g (SD ± 63.1) and 75.2 years (SD ± 12.1) and 127.2 g (SD ± 83.6), respectively (P < .01 and P = .16; postpropensity matching: P = .38 and P = .35, respectively). Indications for PAE included lower urinary tract symptoms, acute or chronic urinary retention, and hematuria. Procedural and patient-specific metrics were reviewed. Technical success was defined as bilateral PAE. Adverse events were recorded according to the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) adverse events classification. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 798 (97.2%) patients in Group R and 165 (93.2%) patients in Group F. Mean procedural time, single- and continuous-rotation fluoroscopy time, dose area product, and air kerma were significantly lower in Group R than in Group F (P < .001). Moreover, 6 (0.7%) patients in Group R and 9 (5.5%) patients in Group F had access site ecchymoses, whereas 5 (0.6%) patients in Group R and 6 (3.6%) in Group F had access site hematomas. Two patients experienced transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) after TRA-PAE and recovered without intervention. Two occult radial artery occlusions were noted, but no patient experienced hand ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large single interventional radiologist cohort, TRA-PAE demonstrated similar technical success to that of TFA-PAE with lower access site hemorrhagic complications and radiation requirements; however, TIA and occult radial artery occlusions remain a concern.

One-year outcomes after prostate artery embolization versus laser enucleation: A network meta-analysis

Background

Although holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) is considered a size-independent procedure for treatment of an enlarged prostate, prostate artery embolization (PAE) is emerging as an alternative modality to treat moderate and large benign prostatic hyperplasia. This study aims to compare the early post-operative and short-term efficacy of PAE and HoLEP.

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases were searched. Network meta-analysis was performed following PRISMA-N-guidelines. Post-operative parameters analysed include international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL), post-void residual urine (PVR), maximal uroflow rate (Qmax) and serious adverse events (SAE). Random effects model calculated weighted mean differences (WMD). If 95%CI crossed the line of no effect (WMD = 0), evidence indicated no statistically significant difference between treatments compared.

Results

Qualitative and quantitative syntheses included 20 and 18 studies with 1991 and 1606 patients, respectively. At 3 months, there was no statistically significant difference between PAE and HoLEP in IPSS score improvement [WMD: -2.21: 95%CI: (-10.20, 5.78), favouring PAE], QoL score improvement [WMD: -0.22:95%CI: (-1.75, 1.32), favouring PAE] and PVR improvement [WMD: 26.97: 95%CI: (-59.53, 113.48), favouring HoLEP]. However, PAE was found inferior to HoLEP for Qmax improvement [WMD: 8.47, 95%CI: (2.89, 14.05), favouring HoLEP]. At 1-year follow-up, there was no statistically significant was found between PAE and HoLEP for IPSS score improvement [WMD:6.03, 95%CI: (-1.30, 13.35)], QoL score improvement [WMD: 0.03, 95%CI: (-1.19, 1.25)], PVR improvement [WMD:4.11, 95%CI: (-32.31, 40.53)] and Qmax improvement [WMD:2.60, 95%CI: (-2.20, 7.41)] with all differences favouring HoLEP. PAE was superior to HoLEP for SAE [PAE vs. HoLEP-OR: 0.68, 95%CI: (0.25, 1.37)].

Conclusion

HoLEP was superior to PAE at 3 months for Qmax improvement. There was no significant difference in IPSS, QoL, PVR and Qmax improvement at 1 year between PAE and HoLEP. PAE was also associated with lesser SAE compared to HoLEP. Studies on the long-term outcome of PAE are needed to establish the durability of early outcomes after PAE.

Comparing prostatic artery embolization to surgical and minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To summarize current evidence to report a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open simple prostatectomy (OSP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies published from inception until August 2021. The search terms used were (prostate embolization OR prostatic embolization) AND (prostatic hyperplasia OR prostatic obstruction) as well as the abbreviations of PAE and BPH. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for observational studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included with 810 patients: five RCTs and one observational study compared PAE with TURP, and one observational study compared PAE with OSP. The included studies had considerable risk of bias concerns. TURP and OSP were associated with more statistically significant improvements in urodynamic measures and BPH symptoms compared to PAE. However, PAE seems to significantly improve erectile dysfunction compared to OSP and improve other outcome measures compared to TURP, although not significantly. PAE appeared to reduce adverse events and report more minor complications compared with TURP and OSP, but it is unclear whether PAE is more effective in the long-term.

CONCLUSION

PAE is an emerging treatment option for patients with symptomatic BPH who cannot undergo surgery or have undergone failed medical therapy. Overall, PAE groups reported fewer adverse events. Future ongoing and longer-term studies are needed to provide better insight into the benefit of PAE compared to other treatment options.

[Minimally invasive treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia : The German S2e guideline 2023-part 4]

BACKGROUND

Lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive for benign prostatic obstruction (LUTS/BPO) are one of the most frequent diseases in men and can have a significant impact on quality of life. Instrumental therapies are common, and many patients seek minimally invasive treatment options.

OBJECTIVE

Presentation and evidence-based evaluation of the minimally invasive therapy for benign prostatic syndrome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Summary and overview of chapters 11-13 on minimally invasive therapies for LUTS/BPO of the current long version of the German S2e guideline.

RESULTS

In case of absolute indication for surgery or after unsatisfactory or undesired medical therapy, minimally invasive treatments such as UroLift® (Neotract Inc., Pleasanton, CA, USA), Rezῡm™ (Boston Scientific, Malborough, MA, USA), iTIND™ (Olympus America Inc., Westborough, MA, USA), and prostatic artery embolization (PAE) can be considered. These indirect/delayed ablative therapies offer lower morbidity and the possibility of performing them under local anesthesia, but they are inferior to direct ablative/resective techniques in terms of effectiveness and sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

The updated German S2e guideline summarizes evidence-based recommendations for new minimally invasive therapies for LUTS/BPO, which present alternative treatment options for selected patients.

Cardiovascular Comorbidities Do Not Impact Prostate Artery Embolisation (PAE) Outcomes: Retrospective Analysis of the National UK-ROPE Registry

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.

Prostate Artery Embolization in the Treatment of Massive Intractable Bleeding from Prostatic Neoplasms: A Case Report and Systematic Review

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and hematuria are common symptoms in men with neoplasms, mainly affecting the elderly population. Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) is a minimally invasive procedure that has shown promising results in managing LUTS and massive intractable prostatic hematuria in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (PCa). A few studies, however, have provided valuable insights into the durability and efficacy of PAE focusing on the long-term effectiveness, quality of life, and cancer-specific control of hemostasis and urinary symptoms. As a result of concomitant cardiovascular conditions, these patients often take anticoagulants or antithrombotics, which can worsen their hematuria and clinical status. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is considered a very high-risk procedure, even without massive bleeding, and requires discontinuation of vitamin K antagonists and antiplatelet therapies. Such patients usually have their surgery postponed, and PAE should be considered a safe alternative treatment. We aimed to report a narrative review from 1976 to June 2023 of the current state of PAE for massive and intractable hematuria, highlighting recent developments in this technique, including prospective cohort studies, and focusing on long-term outcome, safety, and complication management of patients with prostatic neoplasms who develop significant hemorrhagic symptoms. Additionally, we present a case report and a simple algorithm for treating intractable bleeding in a 92-year-old man with PCa and massive hematuria.

Prostatic Artery Embolization as a Treatment Option for Symptomatic Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Results from the Prospective Follow-Up Study in Lithuania

Background: The endovascular treatment of symptomatic benign prostate hypertrophy (BPH) by prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is one of the new treatments proposed. PAE is a minimally invasive alternative that has been shown to successfully treat lower urinary tract symptoms in BPH patients by causing infarction and necrosis of hyperplastic adenomatous tissue, which decompresses urethral impingement and improves obstructive symptoms. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and efficacy of PAE in relieving symptoms in patients with symptomatic BPH. Materials and Methods: The material for the study was collected from 2019 to 2022. A total of 70 men with BPH and PAE were studied. Patients underwent an urological examination to measure the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Quality of Life score (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function short form (IIEF-5), uroflowmetry with Qmax, prostatic volume (PV), and post-void residual volume (PVR) measurements. Statistical analysis for dependent samples was applied. Measured parameters at 2 months and 6 months follow-up were compared to baseline. Results: At baseline, the age of the male (N = 70) subjects was 74 ± 9.6 years with a median of 73.8, but fluctuated from 53 to 90 years. The mean of PV was almost 111 mL and the Qmax was close to 7.7 mL/s. The average PVR was 107.6 mL. The IPSS score mean was 21.3 points and the QoL score was 4.53 points. The IIEF-5 questionnaire score was almost 1.8 points, which shows severe erectile dysfunction. The mean value of the PSA level was 5.8 ng/mL. After 2 and 6 months of PAE, all indicators and scores except erectile function significantly improved. Conclusions: The outcomes of our study show promising results for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia after PAE. The main prostate-related parameters (PV, Qmax, PVR, IPSS) improved significantly 6 months after embolization.

Treating LUTS in Men with Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Review Article

Benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) is a prevalent condition that affects men, primarily toward their old age. The condition is often accompanied by lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), which can significantly impair a patient's quality of life and lead to other medical complications. Accurate diagnosis of BPO is essential for effective management of complications secondary to BPO, and treatment plans should be tailored patients, and occasionally according to surgeon experience. As such, this literature review aims to analyze the current available data on male LUTS secondary to BPO by providing a comprehensive overview of relevant studies, as well as the surgical and medical management guidelines from the Canadian Urological Association (CUA), American Urological Association (AUA), and European Association of Urology (EAU). By synthesizing the existing literature, this review purports to summarize the current body of knowledge surrounding BPO and male LUTS, and support healthcare providers in making informed decisions about the management of male LUTS secondary to BPO, ultimately improving patient outcomes and quality of life.

Prostatic Arterial Embolization for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Associated with Benign Prostatic Enlargement

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is an emerging minimally invasive technique for lower urinary tract symptom reduction from benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH). While the technique is becoming increasingly popular with patients and interventional radiologists, most urologists remain skeptical of the PAE's long-term efficacy and comparative success to the gold standard transurethral resection of the prostate.

RECENT FINDINGS

PAE has been found in multiple meta-analyses to perform similarly to the gold standard transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) with regard to patient-driven measures like IPSS and IPSS-QoL, while also performing favorably in objective measurements including Qmax and PVR out to at least 12 months post intervention. Furthermore, PAE has a demonstrated shorter hospital length of stay and fewer adverse events when compared to TURP. PAE provides patients with an alternative to transurethral options for the management of LUTS in the setting of bladder outlet obstruction. While long-term evidence demonstrating the durability of PAE is still forthcoming, the procedure has been demonstrated to be safe according to multiple meta-analyses. Patients deserve to be counseled on PAE as an alternative to surgery and made aware that while the overall treatment effect may not be as robust or durable, the procedure carries a favorable adverse event profile that is attractive to patients wishing to avoid a trans-urethral approach.

Prostatic artery embolisation versus medical treatment in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (PARTEM): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3, superiority trial

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.

Novel minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To review and compare the effectivity of novel minimally invasive treatments (MITs) to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from January 2010 to December 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating MITs, compared to TURP or sham, in men with LUTS. Studies were assessed by risk of bias tool, and evidence by GRADE. Functional outcomes by means of uroflowmetry and IPSS were the primary outcomes, safety and sexual function were secondary outcomes. As part of this review, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted. MITs were ranked based on functional outcome improvement probability.

RESULTS

In total, 10 RCTs were included, evaluating aquablation, prostatic urethral lift, prostatic artery embolization (PAE), convective water vapor thermal treatment or temporary implantable nitinol device. All MITs showed a better safety profile compared to TURP. Functional outcome improvement following aquablation were comparable to TURP. In the NMA, aquablation was ranked highest, PAE followed with the second highest probability to improve functional outcomes. Other novel MITs resulted in worse functional outcomes compared to TURP. Level of evidence was low to very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Five MITs for treatment of LUTS were identified. Aquablation is likely to result in functional outcomes most comparable to TURP. Second in ranking was PAE, a technique that does not require general or spinal anesthesia. MITs have a better safety profile compared to TURP. However, due to high study heterogeneity, results should be interpreted with caution.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Prostatic Artery Embolization for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

PURPOSE

To perform a post hoc cost-utility analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial comparing prostatic artery embolization (PAE) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a cost-utility analysis over a 5-year period to compare PAE versus TURP from a Spanish National Health System perspective. Data were collected from a randomized clinical trial performed at a single institution. Effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was derived from the cost and QALY values associated with these treatments. Further sensitivity analysis was performed to account for the impact of reintervention on the cost-effectiveness of both procedures.

RESULTS

At the 1-year follow-up, PAE resulted in mean cost per patient of €2904.68 and outcome of 0.975 QALYs per treatment. In comparison, TURP had cost €3846.72 per patient and its outcome was 0.953 QALYs per treatment. At 5 years, the cost for PAE and TURP were €4117.13 and €4297.58, and the mean QALY outcome was 4.572 and 4.487, respectively. Analysis revealed an ICER of €2121.15 saved per QALY gained when comparing PAE to TURP at long-term follow-up. Reintervention rate for PAE and TURP was 12% and 0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to TURP, in short term, PAE could be considered a cost-effective strategy within the Spanish healthcare system for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia. However, in long term, the superiority is less apparent due to higher reintervention rates.

Ultrasound-guided perineal laser ablation versus prostatic arterial embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: two similar short-term efficacies

BACKGROUND

There are many ways to treat prostatic hyperplasia; these are currently more inclined to minimally invasive treatment. We mainly compared the differences between two treatment methods， ultrasound-guided transperineal laser ablation (US-TPLA) and prostatic artery embolization (PAE).

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of US-TPLA and PAE in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The clinical information for 40 patients with BPH admitted to our hospital between June 2018 and January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The changes in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual (PVR), prostate volume (PV), and the incidence of complications were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The IPSS (P < 0.001; P < 0.001), QoL (P < 0.001; P < 0.001), Qmax (P < 0.001; P < 0.001), PVR (P < 0.001; P < 0.001), and PV (P < 0.001; P < 0.001) at three and six months after US-TPLA and PAE improved with respect to those before surgery. There was no significant difference in IPSS (P = 0.235; P = 0.151), QoL (P = 0.527; P = 0.294), Qmax (P = 0.776; P = 0.420), PVR (P = 0.745; P = 0.607), and PV (P = 0.527; P = 0.573) between the groups at three and six months after surgery. No serious complications occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION

US-TPLA and PAE seem to have a similar short-term efficacy. The efficacy of the two procedures is comparable, and neither is associated with serious complications. US-TPLA and PAE are both effective complementary measures for the treatment of BPH.

Top 50 most cited articles on prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: A bibliometric review

BACKGROUND

Bibliometric analysis can be used to assess the current state of the literature and publication trends on a given topic. There has not been a review of this kind on prostatic artery embolization (PAE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PAE is a relatively new and somewhat controversial treatment option for BPH. Given the novelty and controversy, there has been much research published on the topic recently.

AIM

To survey the current state of research on PAE for BPH by using bibliometric analysis to analyze the top 50 most highly cited articles.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed using the Web of Science database to identify the most cited articles published on PAE for BPH as of June 2022. Articles that did not primarily focus on PAE or BPH as an indication were eliminated. The 50 most cited articles were carried forward for analysis.

RESULTS

All but 6 articles were published in the last decade with contributions from 15 countries. Fifty-two percent of the studies had a C level of evidence. The majority were published in the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology and Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology. Twenty percent (n = 10) of the articles were published in urologic journals. On average, articles published in urologic journals tended to be more recent. The mean year of publication for an article in a urological journal was 2016.6 compared to 2013.9 in a non-urologic journal (P = 0.02). Seventy percent of the articles focused on clinical outcomes, while only 2% focused on practice guidelines. Self-citations accounted for 11.4 citations per article on average, corresponding to 14.7% of all citations analyzed.

CONCLUSION

The most influential papers on this topic represent a fairly recent body of work with contributions from a wide variety of countries and journals. The fact that articles in urologic journals were published significantly more recently than articles on the list in non-urologic journals may suggest that the field of urology is starting to accept PAE for a wider range of indications. Finally, while there has been much high-quality research published, more influential studies on practice guidelines and technique may be beneficial.

Long-term outcomes of prostate artery embolization for acute urinary retention: An analysis of 88 patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess long-term outcome of prostate artery embolization (PAE) in patients presenting with acute urinary retention related to benign prostatic hyperplasia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent PAE for acute urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia from August 2011 to December 2021 in a single institution were retrospectively included. There were 88 men with a mean age of 72 ± 12 (standard deviation [SD]) years (range: 42-99 years). Patients underwent a first attempt of catheter removal two weeks after PAE. Clinical success was defined as the absence of acute urinary retention recurrence. Correlations between long-term clinical success and patient variables or bilateral PAE were searched for using Spearman correlation test. Catheter-free survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Successful catheter removal in the month following PAE was performed in 72 (72/88; 82%) patients and 16 (16/88; 18%) patients had immediate recurrence. Clinical success persisted for 58 (58/88; 66%) patients at long-term follow-up (mean follow-up: 19.5 months ± 16.5 [SD]; range: 2-74 months). Recurrence occurred at a mean of 16.2 months ± 12.2 (SD) (range: 1.5-43 months) post-PAE. Overall, 21 (21/88; 24%) patients of the cohort underwent prostatic surgery, at a mean of 10.4 months ± 12.2 (SD) (range: 1.2-42.4 months) from initial PAE. No correlations between patients variables or bilateral PAE and long-term clinical success were identified. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a three-year catheter free probability of 60%.

CONCLUSION

PAE is a valuable technique for acute urinary retention related to benign prostatic hyperplasia, with a long-term success rate of 66%. However acute urinary retention relapse affects 15% of patients.

Comparative efficacy and safety of prostatic urethral lift vs prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare the clinical efficacy and safety of prostatic urethral lift (PUL) and prostatic artery embolization (PAE) for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) by means of a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Web of Science from inception to March 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared PUL or PAE with either transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) or sham procedures as control interventions. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were performed to pool the data on direct and indirect comparisons between interventions using STATA 14.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs with 675 participants were included in our network meta-analysis. Quantitative synthesis revealed that TURP was the most efficacious intervention for clinical (International Prostate Symptoms Score and quality of life) and functional outcomes (maximum urinary flow rate and post-void residual urine volume), and was associated with a lower reintervention rate compared with PAE (risk ratio [RR] 2.08 with 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96 to 4.51) and PUL (RR 2.33 with 95% CI 0.50 to 10.86), although the difference were not statistically significant. Indirect comparison indicated that PUL and PAE resulted in similar outcomes. PAE was associated with fewer minor adverse events (AEs; RR 0.75 with 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18) and PUL with fewer major AEs (RR 0.72 with 95% CI 0.17 to 3.13) when compared with TURP. Whilst PAE had a better ranking with regard to improvement of most clinical and functional outcomes, PUL was the best ranked procedure regarding erectile function, as measured by the International Index of Erectile Function 5, but no significant difference was observed.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that PUL and PAE have similar clinical efficacy and safety profiles in the management of LUTS associated with BPH. However, the quality of evidence is relatively low because of the paucity of RCTs available, and results should be interpreted with caution.

Prostatic arterial embolization versus holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: 1-year outcomes

PURPOSE

Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) and Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) are novel techniques for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia lower urinary tract symptoms (BPH-LUTS). The objective of this study was to describe and compare the functional results and complications of these two techniques at one year follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective, monocentric study of all patients consecutively treated in our center with HoLEP or PAE for symptomatic or complicated BPH between January 2016 and December 2019. Data regarding patient and perioperative characteristics, follow-up biological results, functional questionnaires and uroflowmetry were collected from medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 490 and 57 patients were treated with HoLEP and PAE, respectively. The demographic and clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. The operative time was significantly higher for PAE (p < 0.001) and hospitalization time longer after HoLEP (p = 0.0006). The urinary catheterization time was longer after PAE (p < 0.001). The prostatic volume treated was higher with HoLEP than with PAE (56% versus 26%, p < 0.001). The mean difference in IPSS from baseline to 12 months was significantly higher after HoLEP than after PAE: - 17.58 versus - 8 (p < 0.001). The mean difference in QoL-IPSS from baseline to 12 months was significantly higher after HoLEP: - 4.09 versus - 2.27 (p < 0.001). The rate of postoperative adverse events in the first three months was similar between the two groups:35% after HoLEP and 33% after PAE (p = 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

HoLEP and PAE both significantly improved BPH-LUTS, with HoLEP having an advantage over PAE.

Prostatic arterial embolisation for men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a Cochrane review

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE) compared to other procedures for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), as well as non-randomised studies (NRSs) enrolling men with BPH undergoing PAE vs other surgical interventions via a comprehensive search up until 8 November 2021. Two independent reviewers screened the literature, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, performed statistical analyses by using a random-effects model, and rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) of RCTs and NRSs.

RESULTS

We found data to inform two comparisons: PAE vs transurethral resection of prostate (TURP; six RCTs and two NRSs), and PAE vs sham (one RCT). This abstract focuses on the primary outcomes in a comparison of PAE vs TURP. Short-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, there may be little to no difference in urological symptom score improvement (mean difference [MD] 1.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.37 to 3.81; low CoE) and quality of life (QoL; MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.84; low CoE) measured by International Prostatic Symptom Score. We are very uncertain about the effects of PAE on major adverse events (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.19-2.97; very low CoE). Long-term follow-up: based on RCT evidence, PAE may result in little to no difference in urological symptom scores (MD 2.58, 95% CI -1.54 to 6.71; low CoE) and QoL (MD 0.50, 95% CI -0.03 to 1.04; low CoE). We are very uncertain about major adverse events (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.20-4.05; very low CoE).

CONCLUSION

Compared to TURP, the impact on urological symptoms and QoL improvement as perceived by patients appears to be similar. This review did reveal major uncertainty as to how major adverse events compare.

Prostatic artery embolization compared to transurethral resection of the prostate and prostatic urethral lift: a real-world population-based study

BACKGROUND

There are growing interests for minimally invasive surgical techniques (MISTs) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-associated lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) uses selective angioembolization of prostatic arteries, thereby reducing size to improve LUTS/BPH. However, real-world data comparing surgical outcomes between MISTs and tissue resective techniques are lacking. We assessed the differences in surgical outcomes between PAE, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), and prostatic urethral lift (PUL) in a real-world population for LUTS/BPH.

METHODS

We present an observational population-based study of 12,902 men with BPH in New York State who received PAE, TURP, and PUL in outpatient and ambulatory surgery settings from 2014 to 2018. For short-term outcomes, we report 30-day and 90-day risks of readmission to inpatient and emergency room (ER) with/without complications and compared them across groups using χ² tests and mixed-effect logistic regressions. For long-term outcomes, we report surgical retreatment and stricture rates using Kaplan-Meier failure curves and compared them using Log rank tests and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

Of 12 902 men, 335 had PAE, 11,205 had TURP, and 1362 had PUL. PAE patients had the highest 30-day (19.9%) and 90-day (35.6%) risks of readmission to inpatient or ER (p < 0.01). Non-specific abdominal pain was the main diagnosis associated with 30-day and 90-day readmissions to inpatient or ER after PAE (14.3% and 26.8%, respectively). After 2 years of follow-up, PAE patients had the highest retreatment rate of 28.5% (95%CI 23.7-34.2%) compared to TURP (3.4% (95%CI 3.1-3.8%)) and PUL (8.5% (95%CI 5.6-12.9%)) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world population, PAE was associated with the most frequent 30-day and 90-day readmission to inpatient or ER and the highest retreatment rate among all surgical techniques even when controlled for individual patient comorbidities and surgical volume.

Minimally Invasive Treatment in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH)

Review efficacy and safety of minimally-invasive treatments for Low Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) in patients affected by Benign Prostate Hyperplasia (BPH). We performed a systematic review of the literature from 1993 to 2022 leveraging original research articles, reviews, and case-studies published in peer-reviewed journals and stored in public repositories. Prostate artery embolization (PAE), transurethral needle ablation (TUNA), transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT), high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), laser treatments and Cryoablation are valid and safe alternatives to the gold standard (surgery) in the treatment of LUTS in patients affected by BPH, with fewer undesired effects being reported.

Comparison of 24-Month Clinical Outcomes after Prostatic Artery Embolization in Prostate Glands Larger versus Smaller than 80 mL: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

This review was undertaken to compare the clinical outcomes of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with >80 versus <80 mL prostatic volume (PV) at the 24-month follow-up to determine whether PV predicted the effectiveness or durability of PAE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed/MEDLINE database was searched for articles published between 2010 and 2022 using the search term "(prostat∗ artery embolization) AND (long term OR follow-up OR 24-month)." Articles were included if they discussed PAE for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and reported a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Articles with <10 patients were excluded. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate for any difference in clinical outcomes at the 24-month post-PAE follow-up between studies with a mean PV of >80 mL and those with a mean PV of <80 mL.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies with 2,260 patients were included, all of which demonstrated significant reduction in symptoms at the 24-month follow-up after PAE. Four studies were included as part of the >80-mL PV subgroup (n = 467), and 10 studies were included as part of the <80-mL PV subgroup (n = 1,793). There was a statistically significant difference between the mean preprocedural PV (128.5 vs 64.0 mL; P = .015). At the 24-month follow-up, there were no significant differences between groups across any of the compared parameters. The collective incidence of major adverse events reported in the studies within this review was <1%.

CONCLUSIONS

PAE is both safe and durable for patients suffering from BPH and can be effective across a wide range of baseline PVs.

Prostatic Artery Embolization Versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the cost effectiveness of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with that of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for the treatment of medically refractory benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis with Markov modeling was performed, comparing the clinical course after PAE with that after TURP for 3 years. Probabilities were obtained from the available literature, and costs were based on Medicare reimbursements and published cost analyses. Outcomes were measured using quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Statistical analyses included base case calculation, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and deterministic sensitivity analysis to assess the robustness of the conclusion under different clinical scenarios.

RESULTS

Base case calculation showed comparable outcomes (PAE, 2.845 QALY; TURP, 2.854 QALY), with a cost difference of $3,104 (PAE, $2,934; TURP, $6,038). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $360,249/QALY. PAE was dominant in 23.2% and more cost effective in 48.4% of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis simulations. PAE was better if its recurrence risk was <20.4% per year and even when the TURP recurrence risk was assumed to be 0%. TURP would be more cost effective when its procedural cost was <$3,367 or the PAE procedural cost >$4,409. PAE remained cost effective when varying the risks and costs of the minor and major short-term or long-term adverse events of both procedures. TURP would be the better strategy if the utility of BPH recurrence was <0.85 QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

PAE is a cost-effective strategy to treat medically refractory BPH, resulting in comparable health benefits at a lower cost than that of TURP even when accounting for extreme alterations in adverse events, costs, and recurrence rates.

The State of Evidence in Prostate Artery Embolization

Prostate artery embolization (PAE) has emerged over the past two decades as a minimally invasive, nonsurgical treatment for benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH). While the majority of evidence for PAE stems from retrospective cohort studies, several seminal randomized controlled trials have been performed comparing short-term outcomes of PAE to transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and against a sham procedure. Across clinical trials, PAE demonstrates consistent improvement in urological symptoms and quality of life in patients with BPH with low complication rates. When compared to TURP, the results are comparable, but there is a trend for better outcomes in certain clinical parameters with TURP. PAE is a suitable option for patients who are not surgical candidates, prefer nonsurgical treatment with an earlier return to routine activities, and wish to better preserve sexual function.

Updates on Preprocedural Evaluation and Patient Selection for Prostatic Artery Embolization

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is a safe and effective treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Patient evaluation is a critical and important part of this growing practice. History taking should include symptoms score evaluations for lower urinary tract symptoms, erectile function, and prostatitis symptoms score. The objective evaluations commonly include measurement of prostate specific antigen, postvoid residual volume, and uroflowmetry as well as urodynamic studies in selective patients. Imaging evaluation may include computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography, elucidating prostate volume, prostate gland morphology, vasculature, and prostate cancer. With evolving knowledge on PAE, we aim to discuss patient evaluation and selection based on updated evidence and discuss specific scenarios.

Long-Term PAE Results: What Do We Know

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is a minimally invasive technique with proven safety and efficacy to treat lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) or benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). In this review, we discuss the required level of evidence to implement and adopt treatment options for patients with LUTS due to BPO/BPH. Focus is given on the long-term (>3 years) data after PAE with reported outcomes including cohort sizes, follow-up times, reintervention rates (repeat PAE and prostatectomy), need for LUTS/BPO medical therapy, and improvements in International Prostate Symptom Score/quality of life score, peak flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen. The durability of treatment effects after PAE and need for prostatic reinterventions need to be taken into consideration when discussing treatment options with patients and referring colleagues from other medical specialties. Developments in medical devices used for PAE have allowed for a continuous drop in unilateral PAE rates over the last 12 years and will probably play a role in optimizing technical and thus clinical outcomes for patients with LUTS due to BPH/BPO.

Prostate artery embolization on lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a promising minimally invasive therapy that improves lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the gold standard therapy for LUTS/BPH.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PAE vs TURP on LUTS related to BPH.

METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify all published articles on PAE vs TURP for LUTS/BPH. Sources included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library databases, and Chinese databases before June 2022. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Outcome measurements were combined by calculating the mean difference with a 95% confidence interval. Statistical analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 1070 participants were included. Compared with the TURP group, the PAE group had a similar effect on the International Index of Erectile Function (IPSS) score, Peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume (PVR), Prostate volume (PV), prostatic specific antigen (PSA), The International Index of Erectile Function short form (IIEF-5) scores, and erectile dysfunction during 24 mo follow-up. Lower quality of life (QoL) score, lower rate of retrograde ejaculation and shorter hospital stay in the PAE group. There was no participant death in either group. A higher proportion of haematuria, urinary incontinence and urinary stricture was identified in the TURP group.

CONCLUSION

PAE may be an appropriate option for elderly patients, patients who are not candidates for surgery, and patients who do not want to risk the potential adverse effects of TURP. Studies with large cases and long follow-up time are needed to validate results.

Prostate Cancer after Percutaneous Arterial Embolization of the Prostate: A Case Report

We report a patient with prostate cancer found 2 years after percutaneous arterial embolization (PAE) of the prostate with a rapid increase in prostate specific antigen (PSA) 3 months later, even though the initial result was low. He did not consult a urologist during or after PAE until acute urinary retention developed. The clinical stage was cT2cN1M1b with Gleason grade 5 + 5 = 10. An increase in PSA a short interval after PAE may suggest the presence of prostate cancer. We suggest that patients undergoing PAE should consult a urologist, and that PSA levels should be checked every 3 months in the first year after PSA.

Influence of Prostate Artery Embolization on Different Qualities of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is an increasingly used minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) OBJECTIVE: To analyze the impact of PAE on voiding and storage symptoms.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Between July 2014 and May 2019, 351 consecutive men with BPO who underwent PAE were included in a single-center study.

INTERVENTION

PAE is an interventional radiological procedure embolizing the prostatic arteries with microspheres.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary endpoint represented assessment of the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 mo after PAE. Secondary endpoints comprised assessment of IPSS quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function, peak urinary flow rate, postvoid residual volume, prostate volume, and prostate-specific antigen at the same time points. Data were analyzed using standard statistical methods, generalized estimating equations (symptom improvement over time as odds ratios), and McNemar-Bowker test (degree of improvement compared between symptoms).

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Clinical success rates for PAE were 68%, 73%, and 66% at 1, 12, and 24 mo, respectively. The median IPSS improved significantly from 22 to 10 points after 2 yr (p < 0.001). Storage (-50%) and voiding (-58%) symptoms improved similarly (each p < 0.001), with nocturia decreasing least frequently but significantly (p < 0.001). After 1 and 2 yr, 35% (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-41%) and 30% (95% CI 21-40%) of patients reported alleviated storage, and 39% (95% CI 33-45%) and 38% (95% CI 29-49%) reported alleviated voiding symptoms, respectively. QoL improved from 5 to 2 points (p < 0.001). The main limitation is the number of patients lost during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

PAE significantly improved voiding and storage symptoms to a similar extent. This study may aid in counseling patients about this minimally invasive BPO treatment.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a minimally invasive treatment option for patients with voiding and storage symptoms from benign prostate enlargement. Our analysis shows that PAE improves relevant lower urinary tract symptoms.

Efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and indwelling urinary catheter: A retrospective multicenter study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this multicenter study was to evaluate the clinical success at three months of prostate artery embolization (PAE), assess PAE safety in centers with various experiences and identify factors associated with PAE success.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective study included patients who underwent PAE for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) including those with indwelling urinary catheter. PAE clinical success was defined as either 25% improvement of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) or 1-point improvement of quality of life (QoL) score, or catheter removal at three months. Multivariable analyses were performed using a logistic regression adjusted on patient variables, technical parameters and center experience in PAE.

RESULTS

A total of 383 men (mean age, 68.4 ± 9.7 [standard deviation] years; range: 46-94) with LUTS, including 99 (25.8%) patients with indwelling urinary catheter, were included in seven centers from January 2017 to March 2019. Five patients reported major complications (1.3%), three (0.8%) penile ulceration, three (0.8%) acute urinary retention, one (0.3%) prostatic abscess, and 56 (14.6%) minor complications. Follow up data were available for 271 patients (center 1: n = 159; other centers: n = 112). Clinical success was reported in 232 patients (85.6%). In multivariable analyses, presence of cardiovascular comorbidities (diabetes, stroke history, myocardial infarction and lower limb artery disease) was the single independent variable inversely associated with PAE clinical success (odds ratio = 0.396; 95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.91; P = 0.029). There was no center effect.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that PAE is safe and effective in centers with various PAE experiences. Cardiovascular comorbidity is the single independent variable associated with PAE failure.

Safety Profile of Ambulatory Prostatic Artery Embolization after a Significant Learning Curve: Update on Adverse Events

Background: to report the safety of outpatient prostatic artery embolization (PAE) after a significant learning curve. Methods: a retrospective bi-institutional study was conducted between June 2018 and April 2022 on 311 consecutive patients, with a mean age of 69 years ± 9.8 (47–102), treated by outpatient PAE. Indications included lower urinary tract symptoms, acute urinary retention, and hematuria. When needed, 3D-imaging and/or coil protection of extra-prostatic supplies were performed to avoid non-target embolization. Adverse events were monitored at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Results: bilateral PAE was achieved in 305/311 (98.1%). Mean dose area product/fluoroscopy times were 16,408.3 ± 12,078.9 (2959–81,608) μGy.m²/36.3 ± 1.7 (11–97) minutes. Coil protection was performed on 67/311 (21.5%) patients in 78 vesical, penile, or rectal supplies. Embolization-related adverse events varied between 0 and 2.6%, access-site adverse events between 0 and 18%, and were all minor. There was no major event. Conclusion: outpatient PAE performed after achieving a significant learning curve may lead to a decreased and low rate of adverse events. Experience in arterial anatomy and coil protection may play a role in safety, but the necessity of the latter in some patterns may need confirmation by additional studies in randomized designs.

Salvage versus primary holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: trends, outcomes and safety analysis

PURPOSE

To study the safety, efficacy and trends in index procedures leading to salvage holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (S-HoLEP).

METHODS

This was a single-institution retrospective review of HoLEPs performed between 2006 and 2020. Patients who underwent S-HoLEP were compared to those undergoing primary holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (P-HoLEP). The endpoint of primary interest were functional outcomes. Changes in index procedures over the study period were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 633 HoLEPs were performed during the study, with 217 being S-HoLEP. The S-HoLEP cohort was older than P-HoLEP cohort, 71.2 years vs 68.8 years (p = 0.03). All other factors were well matched. The most common index procedures prior to S-HoLEP included transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) (87, 40.1%), transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) (44, 20.3%), photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) (24, 11.1%) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL) (24, 11.1%). Preoperative prostate volume, IPSS and Q_max were similar between groups. Intra-operatively, S-HoLEP had longer procedure and morcellation times (p = 0.01 and 0.007). Postoperatively, the S-HoLEP cohort had longer catheter duration and hospitalization (both p < 0.001). Postoperative Q_max, IPSS and 90-day complication rates were similar. On temporal analysis, minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) have become more prevalent as index procedures.

CONCLUSION

S-HoLEP is safe and efficacious for patients requiring additional BPH surgical intervention. S-HoLEP patients had longer operative times and hospital stays but equivalent postoperative functional outcomes compared to P-HoLEP. As MIST mature and gain traction, it is expected that rates of S-HoLEP will continue to rise.

Long-Term Outcome of Prostatic Artery Embolization for Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Single-Centre Retrospective Study in 1072 Patients Over a 10-Year Period

PURPOSE

Assess long-term outcomes of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single centre retrospective study from 2009-2019 including 1072 patients who received PAE and had available follow-up. Patients were evaluated yearly at 1-10 years post PAE using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL), prostate volume (PV), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), peak urinary flow rate (Qmax) and postvoid residual (PVR) volume. The need for prostatic medication, re-intervention rates, repeat PAE and prostatectomy rates were assessed with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and compared between different embolic agents using Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 4.39 ± 2.37 years. At last follow-up visit, mean IPSS and QoL improvements were - 10.14 ± 8.34 (p < .0001) and - 1.87 ± 1.48 (p < .0001) points, mean PV reduction was - 6.82 ± 41.11 cm³ (p = 0.7779), mean PSA reduction was - 1.12 ± 4.60 ng/mL (p = 0.9713), mean Qmax increase was 2.72 ± 6.38 mL/s (p = 0.0005), mean PVR reduction was - 8.35 ± 135.75 mL (p = 0.6786). There were 335 patients (31.3%) needing prostatic medication after PAE. Re-intervention rates were 3.4% at 1 year, 21.1% at 5 years and 58.1% at 10 years. Repeat-PAE rates were 2.3% at 1 year, 9.5% at 5 years and 23.1% at 10 years. Prostatectomy rates were 1.1% at 1 year, 11.6% at 5 years and 35.0% at 10 years. No significant differences were found between polyvinyl alcohol particles, Bead Block, Embospheres and Embozenes.

CONCLUSION

PAE induces durable long-term LUTS relief, with re-intervention rates of 20% in the first 5 years and 30%-60% > 5 years post-PAE.

Prostate Artery Embolization in Patients above Eighty Years Old: Clinical Efficacy and Safety

Purpose Prostate artery embolization (PAE) has been established as an effective treatment option for benign prostate hyperplasia or hematuria of prostatic origin. We aim to confirm the effectiveness and safety of PAE in elderly patients aged ≥ 80 years old.

Materials and Methods Between January 2014 and August 2020, PAE was attempted on 54 elderly patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or prostatic hematuria who were unfit for surgical treatment or opted for PAE. Outcome parameters (International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS], quality of life [QoL] score, International Index of Erectile Function score (IIEF), maximal urinary flow rate, postvoid residual, and prostate volume) were collected and analyzed at baseline, 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years.

Results The mean patient age was 85.29 years (range: 80–98). Technical success was achieved in 50 patients (92.6%). Mean IPSS improved from 18 at baseline to 7.7, 8.5, 8.6, and 9.1 at 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years. Mean QoL improved from 4.9 at baseline to 2.8, 1.7, and 1.5 at 6 months, 1, and 2 years. Mean prostate volume reduced from a baseline of 152.7 to 123.5 mL within 6 months and 120.5 mL after 7 months of PAE. Urinary catheter removal was successful in 13 out of 19 patients with urinary retention. PAE succeeded in stopping bleeding in 16 out of 17 patients with prostate-induced hematuria.

Conclusion PAE is a feasible low-risk treatment for LUTS with or without urinary retention or prostatic hematuria in elderly patients.

Guiding the prostatic artery embolization procedure with computational uid dynamics

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common disease associated with lower urinary tract symptoms and the most frequent benign tumor in men. To reduce BPH therapy complications, prostatic artery embolization (PAE) was developed to replace the surgical options. PAE is a minimally invasive technique in which emboli are injected into the prostate arteries (PA), obstructing the blood flow in the hypervascular nodules. In this work, a personalized PAE treatment strategy was proposed using patient-specific computational fluid dynamics (CFD). First, the hemodynamics environment in the iliac arterial tree considering a large network of bifurcations was studied. The results showed complex blood flow patterns in the iliac arterial network. Subsequently, the transport of embolic particulates during PAE for the standard horizontal and a hypothetical vertical patient positioning was simulated using Lagrangian particle tracking. Emboli with different sizes were released at various locations across the iliac arterial tree. The emboli entering the PA were mapped back to their initial location to create emboli release maps (ERMs). The obtained ERMs during the standard patient positioning for smaller emboli at certain release locations showed distinct regions in which if the emboli were released within these regions, all of them would reach the PA without non-target embolization. During the hypothetical vertical patient positioning, the larger emboli formed a larger coherent region in the ERMs. Our patient-specific model can be used to find the best spatial location for emboli injection and perform the embolization procedure with minimal off-target delivery.