Advertisement

The First 48 Consecutive Patients with 3-Year Symptom Score Follow-Up Post-Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) at a Single-Centre University Hospital

  • Drew MacleanEmail author
  • Mark Harris
  • Joe Long
  • Sachin Modi
  • Timothy J. Bryant
  • Nigel Hacking
Clinical Investigation Arterial Interventions
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Arterial Interventions

Abstract

Introduction

Few studies on prostate artery embolization (PAE) follow patients up after 12 months. We aimed to evaluate the symptomatic efficacy of PAE in our patient cohort at 3 years.

Method

A total of 48 consecutive patients undergoing PAE from June 2012 to August 2014 were included in this retrospective study. All patients underwent formal urodynamics to confirm bladder outflow obstruction prior to PAE. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was performed at baseline, 3 months, 12 months and 3 years post-PAE.

Results

Mean patient age was 65.6 ± 7.4, prostate volume 99.1 ± 56.6 cm3, IPSS 23.5 ± 6.0, quality-of-life score 4.6 ± 0.9, Qmax 8.4 ± 2.8 ml/s, post-void residual volume 185.8 ± 55.6 ml. Technical success (bilateral embolization) was achieved in 43 out of 48 cases (89.6%). 11/39 bilateral PAE patients completing follow-up (2 died, 2 lost to follow-up) underwent surgery, indicating a 71.2% clinical success rate at 3 years. No significant change was demonstrated in IPSS or QOL between 1 and 3 years for patients free from surgical intervention (IPSS 8.3 vs 10.0, p = 0.09 and QOL 1.3 vs 1.5, p = 0.23). 3/11 patients undergoing surgery had a prominent ‘ball-valve’ median lobe, and 1/11 patients had a high bladder neck elevation contributing to symptoms.

Conclusion

Clinical success post-PAE remains high with few patients opting for surgery or experiencing a worsening of symptoms after 12 months.

Keywords

Prostate PAE Embolization Clinical Mid-term BPH 

Notes

Funding

This study was not supported by any funding.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Nigel Hacking has received honoraria from Boston Scientific and Celonova as a speaker and has been on Advisory boards for BTG. Tim Bryant has proctored for Boston Scientific and Terumo and has received speaker honorariums from Boston Scientific. Sachin Modi has received a speaker honorarium from Boston Scientific. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for Publication

Consent for publication was obtained for every individual person’s data included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Carnevale FC, Iscaife A, Yoshinaga EM, Moreira AM, Antunes AA, Srougi M. Transurethral Resection of the prostate (TURP) versus original and PErFecTED Prostate artery embolization (PAE) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): preliminary results of a single center, prospective, urodynamic-controlled analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(1):44–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abt D, Hechelhammer L, Müllhaupt G, Markart S, Güsewell S, Kessler TM, et al. Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial. BMJ. 2018;361:k2338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pisco JM, Bilhim T, Pinheiro LC, Fernandes L, Pereira J, Costa NV, et al. Medium- and long-term outcome of prostate artery embolization for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: results in 630 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(8):1115–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hacking N, Vigneswaran G, Maclean D, Modi S, Dyer J, Harris M, et al. Technical and imaging outcomes from the UK registry of prostate artery embolization (UK-ROPE) study: focusing on predictors of clinical success. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2019;42(5):666–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang X-Y, Zong H-T, Zhang Y. Efficacy and safety of prostate artery embolization on lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Interv Aging. 2016;11:1609–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feng S, Tian Y, Liu W, Li Z, Deng T, Li H, et al. Prostatic arterial embolization treating moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostate hyperplasia: a meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017;40(1):22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zumstein V, Betschart P, Vetterlein MW, Kluth LA, Hechelhammer L, Mordasini L, et al. Prostatic artery embolization versus standard surgical treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2018.09.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Malling B, Røder MA, Brasso K, Forman J, Taudorf M, Lönn L. Prostate artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2019;29(1):287–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pyo J-S, Cho WJ. Systematic review and meta-analysis of prostatic artery embolisation for lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clin Radiol. 2017;72(1):16–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Assis AM de, de Assis AM, Moreira AM, de Paula Rodrigues VC, Yoshinaga EM, Antunes AA, et al. Prostatic ARTERY EMBOLIZATION FOR TREATMENT OF BENIGN prostatic hyperplasia in patients with prostates %3e 90 g: a prospective single-center study. J Vascular Intervent Radiol. 2015. 26: 87–93.https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2014.10.012
  11. 11.
    Wang MQ, Guo LP, Zhang GD, Yuan K, Li K, Duan F, et al. Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to large (%3e80 mL) benign prostatic hyperplasia: results of midterm follow-up from Chinese population. BMC Urol. 2015.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-015-0026-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Amouyal G, Thiounn N, Pellerin O, Yen-Ting L, Del Giudice C, Dean C, et al. Clinical Results after prostatic artery embolization using the PErFecTED technique: a single-center study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(3):367–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kisilevzky N, Faintuch S. MRI assessment of prostatic ischaemia: best predictor of clinical success after prostatic artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clin Radiol. 2016;71(9):876–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maclean D, Harris M, Drake T, Maher B, Modi S, Dyer J, et al. Factors predicting a good symptomatic outcome after prostate artery embolisation (PAE). Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2018;41(8):1152–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Assis AM, Moreira AM, Carnevale FC. Angiographic findings during repeat prostatic artery embolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2018.12.734.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lin Y-T, Amouyal G, Thiounn N, Pellerin O, Pereira H, Del Giudice C, et al. Erratum to: intra-vesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) can be reduced by prostatic artery embolization. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(3):487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin Y-T, Amouyal G, Thiounn N, Pellerin O, Pereira H, Del Giudice C, et al. Intra-vesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) can be reduced by prostatic artery embolization. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(5):690–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yu SCH, Cho CCM, Hung EHY, Zou J, Yuen BTY, Shi L, et al. Thickness-to-height ratio of intravesical prostatic protrusion predicts the clinical outcome and morbidity of prostatic artery embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Vasc Intervent Radiol. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2019.07.035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Magistro G, Chapple CR, Elhilali M, Gilling P, McVary KT, Roehrborn CG, et al. Emerging minimally invasive treatment options for male lower urinary tract symptoms. Eur Urol. 2017;72(6):986–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bilhim T, Pisco J, Pereira JA, Costa NV, Fernandes L, Pinheiro L, et al. Predictors of clinical outcome after prostate artery embolization with spherical and nonspherical polyvinyl alcohol particles in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Radiology. 2016;281(1):289–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Drew Maclean
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mark Harris
    • 2
  • Joe Long
    • 1
  • Sachin Modi
    • 1
  • Timothy J. Bryant
    • 1
  • Nigel Hacking
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Interventional RadiologyUniversity Hospital SouthamptonSouthamptonUK
  2. 2.Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations