Randomised Clinical Trial of Prostatic Artery Embolisation Versus a Sham Procedure for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Background: Prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) has been associated with an improvement of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia (LUTS/BPH), but conclusive evidence of efficacy from randomised controlled clinical trials has been lacking. Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of PAE compared with a sham procedure in the treatment of LUTS/BPH. Design, setting, and participants: A randomised, single-blind, sham-controlled superiority clinical trial was conducted in 80 males ≥45yr with severe LUTS/BPH refractory to medical treatment from 2014 to 2019 in a private clinic, with efficacy assessments at 6 and 12 mo after randomisation. One patient in the PAE group and three in the sham group did not complete the study. Intervention: Patients were randomised 1:1 upon successful catheterisation of a prostatic artery to either PAE or a sham PAE procedure without embolisation. After 6 mo, all 38 patients randomised to the sham group who completed the single-blind period underwent PAE, and both groups completed a 6-mo open period. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: An intention-to-treat analysis of all randomised patients was performed. The coprimary outcomes were the change from baseline to 6 mo in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the quality of life (QoL) score at 6 mo, analysed with analysis of covariance and t test, respectively. Results and limitations: Mean age was 63.8±6.0yr, baseline IPSS 26.4±3.87, and QoL score 4.43±0.52. At 6 mo, patients in the PAE arm had a greater improvement in IPSS, with a difference in the change from baseline of 13.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.2-16.2, p<0.0001), and a better QoL score at 6 mo (difference: 2.13; 95% CI 1.57-2.68, p<0.0001) than the patients in the sham arm. The improvements in IPSS and QoL in the sham group 6 mo after they performed PAE were, respectively, 13.6±9.19 (p<0.0001) and 2.05 ± 1.71 (p<0.0001). Adverse events occurred in 14 (35.0%) patients after PAE and in 13 (32.5%) after sham, with one serious adverse event in the sham group during the open period. No treatment failures occurred. Limitations include a single-centre trial, only severe LUTS/BPH, and follow-up limited to 12 mo. Conclusions: The improvements in subjective and objective variables after PAE are far superior from those due to the placebo effect. Patient summary: Clearly superior efficacy of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) compared with a sham procedure was found in this study, which supports the use of PAE in patients with typical symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Hemangiopericytoma

A propósito de um caso clínico de hemangiopericitoma com localização no membro inferior esquerdo, os autores fazem uma breve revisão desta entidade patológica. Destacam-se as suas principais características clínicas e salienta-se o contributo da arteriografia, no diagnóstico, e tratamento coadjuvante da cirurgia

Endovascular Therapy of Pseudoaneurysm and Arteriovenous Fistula in a Renal Graft

A 31 year old male Caucasian received a renal cadaveric allograft. Reconstruction of an inferior polar artery was corrected pre-implantation. Delayed graft function occurred leading to dialysis support for one month. Graft biopsies(days 7, 15) showed acute tubular necrosis(ATN) and no rejection. Serial ultrasound (US), performed on average weekly, were compatible with ATN. On day 31, Doppler US and a CAT scan suggested for the first time a pseudoaneurysm adjacent to the implantation of the graft artery on the external iliac artery. For clinical and technical reasons, arteriography was only performed on day 67, when serum creatinine was 3.3 mg/dl. It showed a large pseudoaneurysm with an arteriovenous fistula to the right common iliac vein. Compression of the right external iliac artery was clear. In an attempt to close the arteriovenous fistula, the communication with the pseudoaneurysm was embolised with gelfoam and metallic coils with partial success. One week later, by right femoral approach a covered wallstent was placed immediately below the origin of the graft artery.Subsequent Doppler US and arteriography con-firmed closure of the communication with thepseudoaneurysm and of the arteriovenous fistula. The calibre of the right external iliac artery was then normal. By month 18, serum creatinine is stable at 2.1 mg/dl. We can only speculate on the origin of thepseudoaneurysm and of the AV fistula, whichwere not evident until one month post-transplantation. Backtable surgery was performed on thepolar not the main graft artery. Invasive angiography was irreplaceable in this unusual clinical situation

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

The Role of Accessory Obturator Arteries in Prostatic Arterial Embolization

In 9 of 491 patients (1.8%) who underwent prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia from March 2009-November 2013, prostatic arteries arose from the external iliac artery via an accessory obturator artery (AOA). Computed tomography angiography performed before the procedure identified the variant and allowed planning before the procedure. The nine AOAs were catheterized from a contralateral femoral approach. Bilateral PAE was technically successful in the nine patients. There was a mean decrease in international prostate symptom score of 6.5 points and a mean prostate volume reduction of 15.1% (mean follow-up, 4.8 mo) in the nine patients

Randomized Clinical Trial of Balloon Occlusion versus Conventional Microcatheter Prostatic Artery Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Purpose: To compare balloon occlusion prostatic artery embolization (bPAE) with conventional microcatheter PAE (cPAE). Materials and methods: In this single-center trial, between November 2017 and November 2018, 89 patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomly assigned to cPAE (n = 43) or bPAE (n = 46). All patients received embolization with 300-500 μm Embosphere microspheres and were evaluated before and 1 and 6 months after PAE. Primary outcome measure was change from baseline in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Student t test was used for between-group comparisons of change from baseline, and paired t test was used for within-group comparisons. Results: At baseline, groups were identical (P > .05). Unilateral PAE was performed in 4 patients receiving cPAE and 3 patients receiving bPAE (9.30% and 6.52%, P = .708). Procedural and fluoroscopy times, dose area product, air kerma, embolic volume, and mean prostate-specific antigen (PSA) 24 hours after PAE did not differ between groups (P > .05). Coils were used in 6 patients receiving cPAE and 4 patients receiving bPAE (14.0% and 8.70%, P = .51). Assessments at 6 months after PAE showed mean IPSS reduction was 7.58 ± 6.88 after cPAE and 8.30 ± 8.12 after bPAE (P = .65); mean prostate volume reduction was 21.9 cm3 ± 51.6 (18.2%) after cPAE and 6.15 cm3 ± 14.6 (7.3%) after bPAE (P = .05); mean PSA reduction was 0.9 ng/mL ± 2.22 after cPAE and 0.22 ng/mL ± 1.65 after bPAE (P = .10). Penile skin lesions (n = 3) and rectal bleeding (n = 2) were documented only in patients receiving cPAE (11.9%, P = .01). No major adverse events occurred. Conclusions: bPAE is as effective as cPAE in treating benign prostatic hyperplasia with a potential to reduce nontarget embolization.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

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

Sclerotherapy of Ovarian Vein Varicocele: Short- and Long-Term Results

Purpose: To evaluate the safety and efficiency of sclerotherapy in ovarian vein varicocele. Study population: During 6 years, 36 women with the clinical diagnosis of ovarian vein varicocele were evaluated. Methods: The diagnosis was confirmed by flebography of the ovarian vein in 35 of the patients. In these patients sclerotherapy of the ovarian vein was performed with success by selective retrograde catheterization of the ovarian vein by femoral approach in 31 patients and by brachial approach in 4 patients. Four to eight ml of polidocanol l3% was used in each vein. Results: There was clinical improvement with complete resolution of all symptoms in 29 patients(82.9%) and partial symptomatic relief in 6 (17.1%). Long term results, evaluated between 1 and 6 years (mean 37.3 months), showed complete resolution of symptoms in 27 (77.1%) and recurrence in 8 (22.9%). Four patients with recurrence, improved following repeated sclerotherapy. Thus, there was long term improvement in 31 patients (88.6%). Conclusion: Sclerotherapy of ovarian vein appears to be a safe and efficient treatment of ovarian vein varicocele

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

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