scholarly journals Prostatic Artery Embolization: An Alternative Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (02) ◽  
pp. 091-098
Author(s):  
James F. Pike ◽  
William F. Abel ◽  
Tyler B. Seckel ◽  
Christine M.G. Schammel ◽  
William Flanagan ◽  
...  

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

2021 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 219-224
Author(s):  
André Moreira de Assis ◽  
Airton Mota Moreira ◽  
Francisco Cesar Carnevale ◽  
José Ramón Lanz-Luces

Abstract Objective: To describe the safety and efficacy of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with a markedly enlarged prostate. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study including 18 consecutive patients (mean age, 74 years) with benign prostatic hyperplasia, all with a prostate volume ≥ 200 cm3, who were enrolled to receive PAE for the treatment of moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms. Results: The PAE procedure was technically successful in 17 patients (94.4%). During follow-up, clinical failure (defined as an International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS] ≥ 8) was observed in two (11.1%) of those 18 patients. At 3 months of follow-up, there was significant improvement over baseline in all relevant outcome measures: total IPSS (from 15.7 to 2.9); IPSS quality of life score (from 5.2 to 1.0); prostate specific antigen (from 11.4 to 1.82 ng/mL); peak urinary flow rate (from 7.45 to 18.6 mL/s); prostate volume (from 252.4 to 151.6 cm3); and post-void residual volume (from 143.7 to 28.3 mL)-p < 0.05 for all. Of the 18 patients, one (5.6%) presented detachment of prostate tissue and self-limited hematuria, which did not require specific treatment. Conclusion: In patients with a markedly enlarged prostate, PAE proved to be safe and effective, resulting in significant improvements in clinical, imaging, and urodynamic parameters.


2021 ◽  
pp. 039156032199359
Author(s):  
Alexander Izrailevich Neymark ◽  
Andrey Anatoljevich Karpenko ◽  
Boris Alexandrovich Neymark ◽  
Mikhail Alexandrovich Tachalov ◽  
Denis Dmitrievich Arzamastsev ◽  
...  

Purpose: To evaluate the use of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) as a treatment option for patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with prostate volumes of 80 cc and more. Materials and Methods: The study included 75 patients with high anesthesia-related risks for conventional surgery (TURP). All patients were surveyed for symptom burden, using IPSS and quality of life score. The prostate volume was determined by transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS). At baseline, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was obtained in all patients. Urodynamics was evaluated using uroflowmetry. Clinical outcomes were assessed at follow-up 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after PAE. Results: The prostate volume decreased significantly at months 1 and 3 post-treatment; the prostate continued shrinking until month 12, and the size was then stabilized. At month 24, prostate volume decreased by 40.82%, from 134.0 ± 8.3 mL at baseline to 79.3 ± 6.6 mL. Postvoid residual (PVR) urine volume was significantly decreased from 55.9 ± 5.3 mL to 22.0 ± 1.8 mL 1 month after PAE ( p < 0.001). Qmax increased from 9.2 ± 0.3 mL/s to 15.7 ± 0.4 mL/s. IPSS score following PAE decreased from 28.2 ± 0.7 to 9.7 ± 0.8 ( p < 0.001). QoL improvement was observed from 4.8 ± 0.2 at baseline to 1.8 ± 0.2 at month 24 ( p < 0.001). Decreased activity and density of adenomatous tissue resulted in decreased total PSA levels: from 5.9 ± 1.1 ng/mL to 2.6 ± 0.2 ng/mL ( p < 0.001). TURP became feasible in 35 patients due to reduction of prostate volumes below 80 mL after PAE. Conclusions: PAE was effective in relieving LUTS and reducing prostate size, and may be considered as a preoperative approach for patients with large prostate.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhunan Xu ◽  
Zhongbao Zhou ◽  
Yingmei Mu ◽  
Tong Cai ◽  
Zhenli Gao ◽  
...  

Background: Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) has been introduced into clinical practice, but conclusive evidence of efficacy and safety has been lacking.Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) vs. transurethral resection of prostate (TURP), we performed a meta-analysis of clinical trials.Methods: We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from Pubmed, Embase, Wanfang, and CNKI from January 2000 to December 2020 and used RevMan 5.0 to analyze the data after five RCTs were included.Results: The reducing of prostate volume (PV) [Median mean (MD) 14.87; 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.52–22.22; P &lt; 0.0001] and the increasing of maximum flow rate in free uroflowmetry (Qmax) (MD 3.73; 95% CI 0.19–7.27; P = 0.004) were more obvious in TURP than in PAE; however, the rate of lower sexual dysfunction [odds ratio (OR) 0.12; 95% CI 0.05–0.30; P &lt; 0.00001] was lower in PAE compared with TURP. Meanwhile, no conspicuous difference in International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS) score (MD 1.42; 95% CI −0.92 to 3.75; P = 0.23), quality of life (Qol) score (MD 0.21; 95% CI −0.31 to 0.73; P = 0.43), post void residual (PVR) (MD 21.16; 95% CI −5.58 to 47.89; P = 0.12), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) (MD 0.56; 95% CI −0.15 to 1.27; P = 0.12), and complications (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.20–4.05; P = 0.89) between PAE and TURP group was shown.Conclusion: PAE may replace TURP as an alternative treatment for Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients who do not want to have surgery or with operational contraindications.


Urology ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 400-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmitry Kurbatov ◽  
Giorgio Ivan Russo ◽  
Alexander Lepetukhin ◽  
Sergey Dubsky ◽  
Ivan Sitkin ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document