Ejaculatory dysfunction following prostate artery embolization: A retrospective study utilizing the male sexual health questionnaire-ejaculation dysfunction questionnaire

Transperineal laser ablation (TPLA) of the prostate for benign prostatic obstruction: the first 100 patients cohort of a prospective, single-center study

PURPOSE

Transperineal laser ablation (TPLA) is a new minimally-invasive surgical treatment for patients with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). We report the perioperative and mid-term functional results of the first 100 consecutively patients undergoing TPLA at our institution.

METHODS

Clinical data from consecutive patients undergoing TPLA at our institution from April 2021 to July 2023 were prospectively collected. Primary endpoints were the postoperative changes in IPSS, QoL and MSHQ 3-item questionnaires and in Qmax and post-void residual volume (PVR).

RESULTS

Overall, 100 consecutive patients underwent the procedure. Median age and prostate volume were 66 (IQR 60-75) years and 50 (IQR 40-70) ml, respectively. In the cohort, 14 (14%) patients had an indwelling catheter and 81 (81%) were under oral BPO therapy at the time of TPLA. Baseline median Qmax (ml/s) and PVR (ml) were 9.1 (IQR 6.9-12) and 90 (IQR 50-150), respectively, while median IPSS and QoL were 18 (IQR 15-23) and 4 (IQR 3-4). At all the follow-up timepoints, the evaluated outcomes on both symptoms and functional parameters showed a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001). Antegrade ejaculation was preserved in all sexually active patients. No postoperative Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

TPLA represents a safe option for selected well-informed patients swith LUTS due to BPO. Our prospective study confirms the feasibility and favorable perioperative and functional outcomes in a real-world cohort with heterogenous prostate volumes and patient characteristics.

A scoping review of ejaculatory dysfunction due to surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: limitations of available tools for assessment and reporting

INTRODUCTION

Clinicians primarily focus on the presence or absence of anterograde ejaculation following surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Failing to assess dysfunctional ejaculation and associated bother in a granular fashion can underestimate the prevalence and significance of ejaculatory dysfunction in this population.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review provides critical appraisal of existing tools assessing ejaculatory function and associated bother, emphasizing the importance of adequate history-taking, preoperative counseling, and supplemental questions that should be used prior to and after treatment.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using pertinent keywords from 1946 to June 2022. Eligibility criteria included men developing ejaculatory dysfunction following BPH surgery. Measured outcomes included the assessment of patient bother related to ejaculatory function, pre- and postoperative scores from the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ). and Danish Prostate Symptom sexual function domain (DAN-PSSsex).

RESULTS

Results of this study included only 10 documented patients' bother due to ejaculatory dysfunction following treatment. Pre- and postoperative MSHQ were used as the diagnostic tool in 43/49 studies, one study documented "preservation of anterograde ejaculation", and one used DAN-PSSsex. Q1-4 of the MSHQ were used in 33/43 studies, 3/43 used Q1, 3, 5-7, 1/43 used solely Q4, 1/43 used Q1-3 + Q6 and Q7, and 5/43 used the entire MSHQ. No studies used post-ejaculation urinalysis to diagnose retrograde ejaculation. Only four studies explicitly documented bother and found 25-35% of patients were bothered with a "lack of ejaculate" or "other ejaculation difficulties" during sexual activity after BPH surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

There are currently no studies stratifying patient bother by various components of ejaculation (force, volume, consistency, sensation of seminal expulsion, painful ejaculation, etc.) after BPH surgery. Opportunities for improvement exist in reporting ejaculatory dysfunction related to BPH treatment. A comprehensive sexual health history is needed. Further investigation into effects of BPH surgical treatments on specific characteristics of the patient's experience of ejaculation is required.

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.