Comparative Study Using 100–300 Versus 300–500 μm Microspheres for Symptomatic Patients Due to Enlarged-BPH Prostates

Gonçalves, O.D.; Carnevale, Francisco César; Moreira, Aírton Mota; Antunes, Alberto A.; Rodrigues, Vanessa Cristina de Paula; Srougi, Miguel

doi:10.1007/s00270-016-1443-x

Cited by 72 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a small-scale non-randomized comparative study with 15 patients in each arm, Embosphere microspheres of size 100–300 μm and size 300–500 μm were compared for use in PAE for BPH. Although there was no significant difference in functional and imaging outcomes between the two groups, there was a greater incidence of adverse events in the group of smaller particles [14]. In the current study, in which tris-acryl microspheres of size 100 to 300 μm were used, embolization-related complications did not occur, suggesting that it may be safe to use smaller sized microspheres.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Prostate Artery Embolization for Complete Urinary Outflow Obstruction Due to Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy

Cho

Hung

et al. 2016

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWe aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of PAE in weaning of catheter and relieving obstructive urinary symptoms in patients with acute urinary retention (AUR) due to benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH) and failed trial without catheter (TWOC).Materials and MethodsIn this prospective study approved by the institutional review board, a signed informed consent was obtained. Eighteen consecutive patients with AUR due to BPH and failed TWOC were recruited. Nineteen consecutive patients with BPH but without AUR were recruited as a control. Patients with CTA evidence of arterial occlusion or significant stenosis along the prostate artery access path were excluded. PAE was performed using microspheres (100–300 μm diameter). Outcome assessment included successful weaning of catheter in 2 weeks, procedure-related complications, change of symptomatology and urodynamic findings at 1 month as compared to baseline, percent non-perfused prostate volume, and prostate volume reduction on MRI at 2 weeks.ResultsTwo patients in the study group and four in the control group were excluded due to arterial pathology. Embolization of bilateral prostate arteries was achieved in all patients in both the groups (100%). There was no complication. The catheter was successfully weaned in 87.5% (14/16) of patients within 14 days in the treatment group. There was no significant difference in patient demographics, prostate characteristics, and all outcome assessment parameters between both the groups.ConclusionsPAE was probably safe and effective in weaning of catheter and relieving obstructive urinary symptoms in patients due to BPH, with treatment outcomes comparable to those without AUR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 55%

Prostate Artery Embolization for Complete Urinary Outflow Obstruction Due to Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy

Cho

Hung

et al. 2016

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In conclusion, both studies (45,47) have suggested that larger particles tend to perform slightly better, but studies are heterogeneous, and data are yet not enough.…”

Section: Embolization Particlesmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Goncalves et al (45) found minor adverse events in patients treated with smaller microspheres. From 3 to 12 months, the smaller particles size revealed a lower regrowth rate in prostate size.…”

Section: Embolization Particlesmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

State of the art of prostatic arterial embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prostatectomy via open surgery or transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the standard treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Several patients present contraindication for standard approach, individuals older than 60 years with urinary tract infection, strictures, post-operative pain, incontinence or urinary retention, sexual dysfunction, and blood loss are not good candidates for surgery. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is emerging as a viable method for patients unsuitable for surgery. In this article, we report results about technical and clinical success and safety of the procedure to define the current status.

show abstract

“…Early enthusiasm in the procedure was tempered by variable clinical and technical success rates. [5][6][7][8][9] These initial shortcomings were subsequently overcome by more standardization of techniques, 10,11 and better understanding of patient selection and arterial anatomy. 3,7,[12][13][14] Utilizing this refined anatomical and procedural expertise, the goal of this article is to provide a standardized approach to PAE to overcome technical challenges described in the literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prostate Artery Embolization

Mouli

Hohlastos

Salem

2019

Semin intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparative Study Using 100–300 Versus 300–500 μm Microspheres for Symptomatic Patients Due to Enlarged-BPH Prostates

Cited by 72 publications

References 18 publications

Prostate Artery Embolization for Complete Urinary Outflow Obstruction Due to Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy

Prostate Artery Embolization for Complete Urinary Outflow Obstruction Due to Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy

State of the art of prostatic arterial embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia

Prostate Artery Embolization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About