Prostatic artery embolization using reflux-control microcatheter: prospective experience addressing feasibility
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2022
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
SPRINGERNATURE
Citação
CVIR ENDOVASCULAR, v.5, n.1, article ID 62, 7p, 2022
Resumo
PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) using a reflux control microcatheter. Materials and methodsThis is a prospective, single-center investigation that included 10 patients undergoing PAE for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) attributed to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). Baseline, 3-month, and 12-month efficacy endpoints were obtained for all patients and included prostate-specific antigen (PSA), uroflowmetry, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and clinical assessment using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) questionnaire and the IPSS-Quality of life (QoL) item. Complications were assessed using the Cirse classification system. ResultsTen patients entered statistical analysis and presented with significant LUTS improvement 12 months after PAE, as follows: mean IPSS reduction of 86.6% (2.8 vs. 20.7, - 17.9, P < 0.001), mean QoL reduction of 79.4% (1.1 vs. 5.4, - 4.3, P < 0.001), mean prostatic volume reduction of 38.4% (69.3 cm(3) vs. 112.5 cm(3), - 43.2 cm(3), P < 0.001), mean peak urinary flow (Qmax) increase of 199.4% (19.9 mL/s vs. 6.6 mL/s, + 13.3 mL/s, P = 0.006) and mean PSA reduction of 50.1% (3.0 ng/mL vs. 6.1 ng/mL, - 3.0 ng/mL, P < 0.001). One patient (10%) needed transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) after PAE due to a ball-valve effect. One microcatheter (10%) needed to be replaced during PAE due to occlusion. Non-target embolization was not observed in the cohort. ConclusionThis initial experience suggests that PAE using a reflux control microcatheter is effective and safe for the treatment of LUTS attributed to BPH.
Palavras-chave
Benign prostatic hyperplasia, Prostate artery embolization, Lower urinary tract symptoms, Non-target embolization
Referências
- Abt D, 2018, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V361, DOI 10.1136/bmj.k2338
- Ayyagari R, 2019, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V30, P1459, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.05.033
- Bagla S, 2014, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V25, P47, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.09.010
- Bilhim T, 2019, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V30, P1798, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.06.019
- Carnevale FC, 2020, TECH VASC INTERV RAD, V23, DOI 10.1016/j.tvir.2020.100691
- Carnevale FC, 2020, RADIOLOGY, V296, P444, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2020191249
- de Assis AM, 2015, CARDIOVASC INTER RAD, V38, P855, DOI 10.1007/s00270-015-1114-3
- Dias US, 2021, RADIOGRAPHICS, V41, P1509, DOI 10.1148/rg.2021200144
- Feng SJ, 2017, CARDIOVASC INTER RAD, V40, P22, DOI 10.1007/s00270-016-1516-x
- Filippiadis DK, 2017, CARDIOVASC INTER RAD, V40, P1141, DOI 10.1007/s00270-017-1703-4
- Malling B, 2019, EUR RADIOL, V29, P287, DOI 10.1007/s00330-018-5564-2
- McWilliams JP, 2019, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V30, P627, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2019.02.013
- Meira M, 2021, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V32, P106, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2020.09.023
- Moreira AM, 2017, CARDIOVASC INTER RAD, V40, P1490, DOI 10.1007/s00270-017-1765-3
- Pisco JM, 2016, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V27, P1115, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.04.001
- Pyo JS, 2017, CLIN RADIOL, V72, P16, DOI 10.1016/j.crad.2016.10.009
- Rizzitelli S, 2021, DIAGN INTERV IMAG, V102, P641, DOI 10.1016/j.diii.2021.05.002
- Shim SR, 2017, J UROLOGY, V197, P465, DOI 10.1016/j.juro.2016.08.100
- Uflacker A, 2016, J VASC INTERV RADIOL, V27, P1686, DOI 10.1016/j.jvir.2016.08.004
- von Elm E, 2008, J CLIN EPIDEMIOL, V61, P344, DOI [10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008, 10.2471/BLT.07.045120]
- Wang XY, 2016, CLIN INTERV AGING, V11, P1609, DOI 10.2147/CIA.S119241