Randomized Comparison of Prostatic Artery Embolization versus Transurethral Resection of the Prostate for Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

[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.

Benefits and advances of Cone Beam CT use in prostatic artery embolization: review of the literature and pictorial essay

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has proven to be an efficacious treatment for urinary symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia. PAE is performed in a complex and challenging anatomical field which may pose difficulties from procedural standpoint. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been proposed as an invaluable tool during the PAE procedure. A review of different techniques and advancements, as well as demonstration of CBCT benefits via a pictorial overview of the salient examples is lacking. The techniques of CBCT are discussed herein and the virtual injection technology as an advancement in CBCT is discussed. To show the merits of CBCT in PAE, a pictorial overview of various clinical scenarios is presented where CBCT can be crucial in decision making. These scenarios are aimed at showing different benefits including identification of the origin of the prostatic artery and avoiding non-target embolization. Other benefits may include ensuring complete embolization of entire prostate gland as angiographic appearance alone can be inconclusive if it mimics a severely thickened bladder wall or ensuring adequate embolization of the median lobe to provide relief from "ball-valve" effect. Further examples include verification of embolization of the entire prostate when rare variants or multiple (> 2) arterial feeders are present.

Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Open Simple Prostatectomy or Prostate Artery Embolization in Large Prostates: Clinical and Urodynamic Assessment - PoPAE Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of Prostate artery embolization (PAE) and open simple prostatectomy (OP) on lower urinary tract symptoms and urodynamic parameters in subjects with prostate size >80cc³.

METHODS

PoPAE study (OP or PAE) was a randomized, open-label controlled trial performed between January 2020 and May 2022. Subjects with large prostates (>80cc³), urodynamic parameters meeting obstruction criteria (Bladder Outlet Obstruction Index-BOOI>40), and good detrusor function (Bladder contractility index>100) were included. The primary and co-primary endpoints were the variation in peak flow rate on uroflowmetry (Qmax) and BOOI. The secondary endpoints were the IPSS and ultrasonographic changes.

RESULTS

Twenty three and 25 subjects underwent PAE and OP were evaluated, respectively. At baseline, the 2 groups have shown similar clinical, radiological, laboratory, and urodynamic parameters. After 6 months, Qmax improved 8,3 ± 4.17 mL/sec in PAE and 15.1 ± 8.04 mL/sec in OP (mean difference 6.78 in favor of PE; P = .012 [CI -9.00 to -3.00]). After treatment, 88% of those men underwent OP were classified as unobstructed or equivocal (BOOi<40). On the other hand, 70% of subjects underwent PAE remained obstructed (BOOI>40) and none of them shifted to unobstructed status (BOOI<20). It was observed a similar reduction in IPSS and PVR in both groups.

CONCLUSION

PAE was inferior to conventional surgery for releasing BOO and improving peak urinary flow in large prostates. Nevertheless, PAE was able to improve symptoms and PVR, and might be an alternative method in selected patients.

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.

Value of magnetic resonance angiography before prostatic artery embolization for intervention planning

Knowledge about anatomical details seems to facilitate the procedure and planning of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPS). The aim of our study was the pre-interventional visualization of the prostatic artery (PA) with MRA and the correlation of iliac elongation and bifurcation angles with technical success of PAE and technical parameters. MRA data of patients with PAE were analysed retrospectively regarding PA visibility, PA type, vessel elongation, and defined angles were correlated with intervention time, fluoroscopy time, dose area product (DAP), cumulative air kerma (CAK), contrast media (CM) dose and technical success of embolization. T-test, ANOVA, Pearson correlation, and Kruskal-Wallis test was applied for statistical analysis. Between April 2018 and March 2021, a total of 78 patients were included. MRA identified the PA origin in 126 of 147 cases (accuracy 86%). Vessel elongation affected time for catheterization of right PA (p = 0.02), fluoroscopy time (p = 0.05), and CM dose (p = 0.02) significantly. Moderate correlation was observed for iliac bifurcation angles with DAP (r = 0.30 left; r = 0.34 right; p = 0.01) and CAK (r = 0.32 left; r = 0.36 right; p = 0.01) on both sides. Comparing the first half and second half of patients, median intervention time (125 vs. 105 min.) and number of iliac CBCT could be reduced (p < 0.001). We conclude that MRA could depict exact pelvic artery configuration, identify PA origin, and might obviate iliac CBCT. Vessel elongation of pelvic arteries increased intervention time and contrast media dose while the PA origin had no significant influence on intervention time and/or technical success.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Emerging Technologies for the Surgical Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Obstruction. A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) aims at ablating prostate adenoma by resection, enucleation, or vaporisation. Apart from established ablation modes according to the European Association of Urology guidelines, various technologies have emerged as safe/effective alternatives but remain under investigation.

OBJECTIVE

To explore short-term benefits/harms of emerging technologies for surgical management of LUTS/BPO.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL via Ovid up to June 18, 2022. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) exploring aquablation, prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE), Rezum, prostatic urethral lift (PUL), and temporary implantable nitinol device (iTIND) versus sham/transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

We included ten RCTs (1108 men). Aquablation versus TURP: insignificant change in International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS; mean difference [MD] 0.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.44 to 2.44), quality of life (QoL; MD 0.30, 95% CI -0.81 to 0.21), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax; MD -0.30, 95% CI -3.71 to 3.11), retreatment (risk ratio [RR] 0.18, 95% CI 0.02-1.66), and urinary incontinence (UI; RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.26-1.95). PAE versus monopolar TURP (M-TURP): insignificant change in IPSS (MD 3.33, 95% CI -28.39 to 35.05), QoL (MD 0.12, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.54), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5; MD 3.07, 95% CI -1.78 to 7.92), and UI (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.01-2.86), and significant change in Qmax (MD -9.52, 95% CI -14.04 to -5.0), favouring M-TURP. PAE versus bipolar TURP: insignificant change in IPSS (MD -2.80, 95% CI -6.61 to 1.01), QoL (MD -0.69, 95% CI -1.46 to 0.08), Qmax (MD -3.51, 95% CI -8.08 to 1.06), UI (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01-2.51), and retreatment (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.19-19.63). PUL versus TURP: insignificant change in QoL (MD 0.40, 95% CI -0.29 to 1.09), UI (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-1.05), and retreatment (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.12-1.86), and significant change in IPSS (MD 3.40, 95% CI 0.22-6.58), and IIEF-5 (MD 3.00, 95% CI 0.41-5.59) and Qmax (MD -9.60, 95% CI -13.44 to -5.76), favouring PUL and TURP, respectively. Rezum and iTIND have not been evaluated in RCTs against TURP to date.

CONCLUSIONS

Supporting evidence for clinical use of aquablation, PAE, PUL, Rezum, and iTIND is very limited. Benefits/harms should be investigated further in high-quality RCTs.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This review summarises the evidence for the clinical use of aquablation, prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE), prostatic urethral lift (PUL), Rezum, and temporary implantable nitinol device (iTIND) to manage lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. The supporting evidence for the clinical usage of aquablation, PAE, PUL, Rezum, and iTIND is very limited. Benefits and harms should be investigated further in high-quality randomised controlled trials.

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.

Budget impact analysis of transurethral water vapor therapy for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia in the Spanish national healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Several surgical treatments are available for managing lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH). Water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) is a new minimally invasive therapy. This study estimates the budget impact of introducing WVTT for LUTS/BPH into the Spanish health care system.

METHODS

A model simulated the evolution of men over 45 years of age with moderate-severe LUTS/BPH after surgical treatment, over a 4-year time horizon, from the Spanish public health care service´s perspective. The technologies in scope included those most used in Spain: WVTT, transurethral resection (TURP), photoselective laser vapourization (PVP) and holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP). Transition probabilities, adverse events and costs were identified from the scientific literature and validated by a panel of experts. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the most uncertain parameters.

RESULTS

Per intervention, WVTT resulted in savings of €3,317, €1,933 and €2,661 compared to TURP, PVP and HoLEP. Over a 4-year time horizon, when performed in 10% of the cohort of 109,603 Spanish males with LUTS/BPH, WVTT saved €28,770,125 against the scenario without WVTT availability.

CONCLUSIONS

WVTT could reduce the cost of managing LUTS/BPH, increase the quality of health care and reduce the length of procedure and hospital stay.

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.

A Single-Centre Retrospective Analysis of Radial Versus Femoral Prostate Artery Embolization

Purpose: To determine whether route of access, transradial or transfemoral, leads to any discernible differences in patient radiation or contrast medium exposure as well as procedure time in elective prostate artery embolization (PAE).Methods: This retrospective study included sixty patients in total: n = 30 in the radial PAE group, and n = 30 in the femoral PAE group. All procedures were performed in a single angiography suite between May 2018 and January 2021, using a standard kit for each type of vascular access, the same microcatheter/wire combination and embolic agent to super-selectively target and embolize one or both prostate arteries. Outcome measures included dose area product (DAP, µGym²), air kerma (mGy), fluoroscopy time (mins), procedure time (mins) and volume of contrast medium used (mL). Adverse events were also recorded.Results: The radial and femoral groups were matched for age (73.2 ± 7.5 vs 71.3 ± 10.14, P = .41) and body mass index (27.53 ± 5.08 vs 26.41 ± 3.93, P = .38).No significant difference in dose area product, air kerma, fluoroscopy time, procedure time or volume of contrast medium used was found between radial and femoral PAE. No adverse events occurred in either group.Conclusion: Radial PAE is safe and comparable to femoral PAE with respect to patient radiation exposure, contrast medium usage, and procedure duration. Radial access is a useful skill to add to the armament of the interventional radiologist in elective 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.

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.

Prostate Artery Embolization: Challenges, Tips, Tricks, and Perspectives

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) consists of blocking the arteries supplying the prostate to treat benign prostate hypertrophia (BPH). Its effectiveness on both urinary symptoms and flowmetric parameters has now been amply demonstrated by around a hundred studies, including several randomized trials. The main advantage of this procedure is the very low rate of urinary and sexual sequelae, including ejaculatory, with an excellent tolerance profile. The arterial anatomy is a key element for the realization of PAE. Its knowledge makes it possible to anticipate obstacles and prevent potential complications related to nontarget embolization. Nontarget embolization can occur with a small intraprostatic shunt or reflux and has no consequences except some local inflammation symptoms that resolve in a couple of days. Nevertheless, some situations with large arterial shunts arising from the prostatic artery must be recognized (accessory rectal, bladder, or pudendal branches), and must imperatively be protected before embolization, at the risk of exposing oneself to otherwise ischemic complications that are more severe, such as bladder necrosis and skin or mucosal necrosis. This article offers a step-by-step review of the various anatomical and technical key points to ensure technical and clinical success, while avoiding the occurrence of adverse events.

Controversies in Prostate Artery Embolization: Future Best Practice

Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia is correlated with age. Men seeking treatment options with a low side effect profile often turn to prostate artery embolization (PAE). PAE continues to be refined with advanced tools and optimized techniques. Nonetheless, there exist controversies in terms of best practices for the management of lower urinary track symptoms (LUTS) with PAE. These controversies are essential for medical progress. Herein we suggest best practices moving forward based on currently available data. Given extensive safety data, we recommend PAE be considered alongside medical management and as a precursor to surgery. Given demonstrated efficacy across gland sizes, PAE can be performed in a single session, ideally in a hybrid angio-CT suite, without preoperative cross-sectional imaging. PAE should be initially performed with 300- to 500-μm size particles, and instead consider exploring other particles and sizes for repeat PAE. Finally, PAE can also be considered as first-line option for recurrent disease given the efficacy and excellent safety profile. This article is not meant to purport a dogma, but rather to serve as a guide to the experienced practitioner in challenging his or her own biases when performing PAE.

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.

Expression and Significance of D-Dimer and Fibrinogen in Hyperfibrinolysis of Elderly Patients with Bleeding after BPH Operation

Objective

To explore the expression level and diagnostic efficacy of plasma D-dimer (DD) and fibrinogen (FIB) in hyperfibrinolysis of elderly patients with bleeding after benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) surgery.

Methods

70 elderly BPH patients with postoperative hemorrhage and hyperfibrinolysis in our hospital were included into the observation group, and 75 elderly BPH patients with postoperative hemorrhage without hyperfibrinolysis were included into the control group. The serum levels of DD and FIB in the two groups of patients were compared, and the correlation of DD and FIB with clinical features and the diagnostic value of DD and FIB.

Results

Elderly BPH patients with hyperfibrinolysis showed significantly higher levels of DD and FIB than those without hyperfibrinolysis (P < 0.01). The increase in DD and the decrease of FIB were significantly correlated with the prolonged hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) monitoring (P < 0.05). The combination of DD and FIB showed high diagnostic value for postoperative hemorrhage with hyperfibrinolysis (AUC = 0.998).

Conclusion

The combination of plasma DD and FIB effectively and accurately diagnoses postoperative hemorrhage with hyperfibrinolysis. High levels of DD and FIB indicate prolonged hospital stay and postoperative ICU monitoring of elderly BPH patients with hyperfibrinolysis.

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.

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.

Comparison of effectiveness and postoperative complications of different surgical methods in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

Background

More and more new surgical procedures for the treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) are proposed creatively. However, the existing clinical evidence shows that the effectiveness and safety of various procedures exist inconsistent.

Methods

The randomized controlled trials comparing the international prostate score, length of hospital stay, maximum urinary flow rate, operation time, and complication rates of prostatic artery embolization (PAE), Greenlight-XPS Laser prostate vaporization procedure (GLL PVP), diode laser enucleation of prostate (DILEP) and plasmakinetic resection of the prostate (PKRP), transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in patients with BPH were screened out in databases. The primary outcome was pooled using a restricted maximum likelihood-based random-effect model and inverse variance-based fixed-effect model. Cochrane Q statistics and I2 statistics were computed to quantify between-study heterogeneity. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool.

Results

This meta-analysis ultimately included 14 original research papers, with 1,940 participants enrolled. Eight studies were considered to be at moderate risk of bias, while the others were at mild risk of bias. Although the improvement in functional outcome of the DILEP procedure was equivalent to that of the PKRP procedure, the DILEP procedure group had fewer hospital stays than the PKRP group (P=0.01). In addition, even though the performance of the GLL PVP procedure in the improvement of functional outcome was inferior to the counterpart of TURP (P=0.64), it had a much fewer hospital stays (P=0.01). Moreover, there is still insufficient evidence for the improvement of subjective functional indicators of postoperative patients with PAE compared with TURP [international prostate symptom score (IPSS): P=0.73; IPSS QoL: P=0.91], but achieved less satisfactory objective functional outcomes (Qmax: P=0.06; PVR: P=0.00).

Discussion

New surgical procedures such as GLL PVP, PAE, and DILEP were safer than traditional TURP procedures. However, it is not superior to traditional surgery in the improvement of clinical symptoms. In clinical practice, the pros and cons of the new operation and the traditional operation should be carefully weighed, and the operation that is most suitable for the patient's condition should be selected.

Efficacy and Safety of Prostatic Artery Embolization in the Treatment of High Risk Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and its Influence on Postoperative Life Quality of Patients

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy, safety and postoperative quality of life of high risk benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients treated with prostatic artery embolization.

Methods

34 patients with high-risk BPH were selectedfrom January 2020 to June 2021 in our hospital. All patients were treated with prostatic artery embolization. The changes of international prostate symptom score (IPSS), prostate volume (PV), remaining urine (RU), maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), quality of life scale -74(GQOLI-74), time to sleep without disturbance (HUS) judgment, self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) score and self-rating depression scale (SDS) were compared before operation, 1 month and 6 months after operation.

Results

Prostatic artery embolization was successful in all 34 patients, including unilateral embolization in 15 patients and bilateral embolization in 19 patients. No severe complications occurred in the postoperative patients. The IPSS, PV and RU levels of the patient one month and six months after surgery were lower than those before surgery, while the Qmax level was higher than that before surgery. Besides, the IPSS, PV and RU levels six months after surgery were significantly lower than those one month after surgery, and the Qmax level was significantly higher than that one month after surgery (p < 0.05). The GQOLI-74 score six months after surgery was significantly higher than that before surgery (p < 0.05). The HUS of the patient six months after surgery was significantly increased, and the SAS and SDS scores were significantly decreased as compared with those before surgery (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

For high-risk patients with BPH, prostate embolization is an effective and safe method, which can significantly improve the quality of life of patients after surgery and has good application prospects.

Nontarget Radiopaque Embolic Deposition during Prostatic Artery Embolization

This study evaluated detectable nontarget embolization (NTE) during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) and the safety and efficacy of using radiopaque particles in PAE. Ten patients aged >40 years with prostate glands of >50 mL and refractory lower urinary tract symptoms were analyzed. Unenhanced computed tomography scans at baseline and at 3 months after PAE, using 40-90-μm radiopaque spherical embolic beads, were compared to assess the NTE. Growth models evaluated changes from baseline to 3, 6, and 12 months in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak urine flow rate (Qmax), quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and postvoid residual (PVR). The IPSS, QoL, and Qmax improved at all time points (P < .05), with no trend in PVR or IIEF. Adverse events that occurred were minor. Radiographic NTE was seen in all patients, correlating at times with postprocedural symptoms (eg, rectal pain). Symptoms were not correlated with the NTE in some patients, whereas other patients remained asymptomatic despite NTE.

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

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

Prostatic Artery Embolization for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: A Markov Model-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate whether prostatic artery embolization (PAE) can be considered a long-term cost-effective treatment option in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in comparison to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).

METHODS

The in-hospital costs of PAE and TURP in the United States were obtained from a recent cost analysis. Clinical outcomes including nature and rate of adverse events for TURP and PAE along with rates of retreatment because of complications or clinical failure were obtained from peer-reviewed literature. A decision tree-based Markov model was created, analyzing long-term cost-effectiveness for TURP and PAE from a US health care sector perspective. Cost-effectiveness over a time frame of 5 years was estimated while assuming a willingness to pay of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

PAE resulted in overall cost of $6,464.92 and an expected outcome of 4.566 QALYs. In comparison, TURP cost $9,221.09 and resulted in expected outcome of 4.577 QALYs per treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for TURP was $247,732.65 per QALY. On the basis of the willingness-to-pay threshold, PAE is cost effective compared with TURP.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our model, PAE in comparison with TURP can be regarded as a cost-effective treatment option for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms within the US health care system.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

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

Context

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

Objective

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

Evidence acquisition

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

Evidence synthesis

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

Conclusions

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

Patient summary

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

Take Home  Message

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

Adjunctive Coil Embolization of the Prostatic Arteries After Particle Embolization for Prostatic Artery Embolization

PURPOSE

To describe the feasibility, safety and short-term results of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) performed with adjunctive coil embolization of the main prostatic arteries (PA) following particle embolization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 95 patients who underwent PAE with adjunctive bilateral coil embolization of the PAs following particle embolization between September 2018 and May 2021 were included. The patients had a mean prostate size of 115 ± 64 ml, 18/95 with hematuria symptoms, and 16/95 with indwelling urinary catheters. Coil embolization was performed in the main PAs prior to the bifurcation into the anteromedial and posterolateral branches using detachable microcoils. International Prostate Symptoms Score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL), maximum flow rate (Qmax) and adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

IPSS were improved by - 11.2 ± 7.9 (n = 49, P < 0.001) and QOL by - 2.4 ± 1.8 (n = 49, P < 0.001) over a mean follow-up of 10.7 ± 7.9 weeks. Qmax did not demonstrate statistical significance. Twelve patients with hematuria (67%) showed improvement or resolution and twelve patients with indwelling or intermittent catheters (75%) were no longer catheter dependent. Two patients underwent a repeat PAE. There were no adverse events which were attributable to coil embolization.

CONCLUSION

Adjunctive coil embolization of the main PAs following particle embolization is a technically feasible technique with similar short-term clinical outcomes compared to prior studies. This novel technique warrants further prospective investigation with controls.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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