Prostatic Artery Embolization in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Short and Medium Follow-Up

To evaluate the short and mid-term results of prostatic artery embolization in patients with benign prostatic embolization. Retrospective study between March 2009 and June 2011 with 103 patients (mean age 66.8 years, 50-85) that met our inclusion criteria with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. The clinical outcome was evaluated by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function, prostate volume (PV), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), peak urinary flow (Q(max)), and post-void residual volume (PVR) measurements at 3 and 6 months, 1 year, 18 months, and 2 years after PAE and comparison with baseline values was made. Technical and clinical successes, as well as poor clinical outcome definitions, were previously defined. In this review, we evaluate the short and mid-term clinical outcomes and morbidity of patients treated only with non-spherical polyvinyl alcohol. Six months after the procedure, the PV decreased about 23%, IPSS changed to a mean value of 11.95 (almost 50% reduction), the QoL improved slightly more than 2 points, the Q(max) changed to a mean value of 12.63mL/s, the PVR underwent a change of almost half of the baseline value, and the PSA decreased about 2.3ng/mL. In the mid-term follow-up and comparing to the baseline values, we still assisted to a reduction in PV, IPSS, QoL, PVR, and PSA, and an increase in Q(max). Prostatic Artery Embolization is a safe procedure with low morbidity that shows good short- and mid-term clinical outcome in our institution.

Unilateral Versus Bilateral Prostatic Arterial Embolization for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Patients with Prostate Enlargement

PURPOSE: This study was designed to compare baseline data and clinical outcome between patients with prostate enlargement/benign prostatic hyperplasia (PE/BPH) who underwent unilateral and bilateral prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) for the relief of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). METHODS: This single-center, ambispective cohort study compared 122 consecutive patients (mean age 66.7 years) with unilateral versus bilateral PAE from March 2009 to December 2011. Selective PAE was performed with 100- and 200-μm nonspherical polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) particles by a unilateral femoral approach. RESULTS: Bilateral PAE was performed in 103 (84.4 %) patients (group A). The remaining 19 (15.6 %) patients underwent unilateral PAE (group B). Mean follow-up time was 6.7 months in group A and 7.3 months in group B. Mean prostate volume, PSA, International prostate symptom score/quality of life (IPSS/QoL) and post-void residual volume (PVR) reduction, and peak flow rate (Qmax) improvement were 19.4 mL, 1.68 ng/mL, 11.8/2.0 points, 32.9 mL, and 3.9 mL/s in group A and 11.5 mL, 1.98 ng/mL, 8.9/1.4 points, 53.8 mL, and 4.58 mL/s in group B. Poor clinical outcome was observed in 24.3 % of patients from group A and 47.4 % from group B (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: PAE is a safe and effective technique that can induce 48 % improvement in the IPSS score and a prostate volume reduction of 19 %, with good clinical outcome in up to 75 % of treated patients. Bilateral PAE seems to lead to better clinical results; however, up to 50 % of patients after unilateral PAE may have a good clinical outcome.

Embolisation of Prostatic Arteries as Treatment of Moderate to Severe Lower Urinary Symptoms (LUTS) Secondary to Benign Hyperplasia: Results of Short- and Mid-Term Follow-Up

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the short- and medium-term results of prostatic arterial embolisation (PAE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: This was a prospective non-randomised study including 255 patients diagnosed with BPH and moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms after failure of medical treatment for at least 6 months. The patients underwent PAE between March 2009 and April 2012. Technical success is when selective prostatic arterial embolisation is completed in at least one pelvic side. Clinical success was defined as improving symptoms and quality of life. Evaluation was performed before PAE and at 1, 3, 6 and every 6 months thereafter with the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), uroflowmetry, prostatic specific antigen (PSA) and volume. Non-spherical polyvinyl alcohol particles were used. RESULTS: PAE was technically successful in 250 patients (97.9 %). Mean follow-up, in 238 patients, was 10 months (range 1-36). Cumulative rates of clinical success were 81.9 %, 80.7 %, 77.9 %, 75.2 %, 72.0 %, 72.0 %, 72.0 % and 72.0 % at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months, respectively. There was one major complication. CONCLUSIONS: PAE is a procedure with good results for BPH patients with moderate to severe LUTS after failure of medical therapy. KEY POINTS: • Prostatic artery embolisation offers minimally invasive therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia. • Prostatic artery embolisation is a challenging procedure because of vascular anatomical variations. • PAE is a promising new technique that has shown good results.

Prostatic Arterial Embolization to Treat Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) might be a feasible procedure to treat lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients (age range, 62-82 years; mean age, 74.1 y) with symptomatic BPH after failure of medical treatment were selected for PAE with nonspherical 200-μm polyvinyl alcohol particles. The procedure was performed by a single femoral approach. Technical success was considered when selective prostatic arterial catheterization and embolization was achieved on at least one pelvic side. RESULTS: PAE was technically successful in 14 of the 15 patients (93.3%). There was a mean follow-up of 7.9 months (range, 3-12 months). International Prostate Symptom Score decreased a mean of 6.5 points (P = .005), quality of life improved 1.14 points (P = .065), International Index of Erectile Function increased 1.7 points (P = .063), and peak urinary flow increased 3.85 mL/sec (P = .015). There was a mean prostate-specific antigen reduction of 2.27 ng/mL (P = .072) and a mean prostate volume decrease of 26.5 mL (P = .0001) by ultrasound and 28.9 mL (P = .008) by magnetic resonance imaging. There was one major complication (a 1.5-cm(2) ischemic area of the bladder wall) and four clinical failures (28.6%). CONCLUSIONS: In this small group of patients, PAE was a feasible procedure, with preliminary results and short-term follow-up suggesting good symptom control without sexual dysfunction in suitable candidates, associated with a reduction in prostate volume.