Repeat Prostatic Artery Embolization

This is a single-center retrospective analysis of 3 patients (mean age, 61 y ± 8.6) who underwent repeat prostatic artery (PA) embolization (PAE; rPAE) because of clinical failure after PAE. Revascularization of the central gland through a recanalized PA was the most frequent pattern observed (5 of 7; 71.4%), followed by revascularization through penile collateral vessels (2 of 7; 28.6%). Technical success during rPAE was achieved in 5 hemiprostates (83.3%). Clinical success at 6 months after rPAE was achieved in 2 of 3 patients (66.6%). Implications of these findings could be valuable to those performing PAE.     

Magnetic Resonance Angiography for Prostatic Artery Embolization: Origin of a Prostatic Artery from the Accessory Obturator Artery

1. Download : Download high-res image (453KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Repeat Prostatic Artery Embolization for Patients with Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

PurposeTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of repeat prostatic artery (PA) embolization (PAE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).Materials and MethodsA single-center retrospective study was conducted from 2009 to 2018 in 108 patients with symptomatic BPH treated with repeat PAE: group A (n = 39; 36.1%) were patients who never showed a response to PAE, and group B (n = 69; 63.9%) were patients who had clinical improvement in the first 6 months following PAE but relapsing symptoms afterward. The main patterns of revascularization were 75% from the previously embolized PA and 25% from collateral vessels (superior vesical, posterior-lateral PA, penile branches). Technical outcomes and adverse events were registered. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QOL), and clinical success were compared between groups.ResultsMedian follow-up was 18 months (range, 1–36 mo); median interval between PAE and repeat PAE was 420 days (range, 77–2,240 d). Mean procedural time was significantly longer for repeat PAE vs initial PAE (81.1 min vs 67.4 min; P = .0007). There were no major complications and no urinary incontinence. Mean IPSS/QOL improvements were greater in group B vs group A: 9.51 vs 6.13 and 1.30 vs 0.56, respectively (P < .001). The cumulative probability of clinical success after repeat PAE was higher in group B than in group A (P = .0001): 84.1% vs 46.2% at 1 month, 56.7% vs 28.2% at 12 months, and 51.9% vs 16.9% at 24–36 months.ConclusionsRepeat PAE is safe and effective for recurrence of lower urinary tract symptoms caused by BPH but has limited impact in patients who did not show a response to initial PAE.     

Prostatic Artery Perfusion from the Medial Circumflex Femoral Artery

1. Download : Download high-res image (248KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Utility of MR Angiography in the Identification of Prostatic Artery Origin Prior to Prostatic Artery Embolization

In 17 patients who underwent prostate artery embolization for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms, the accuracy of preprocedural magnetic resonance (MR) angiography was retrospectively compared with intraprocedural digital subtraction angiography (DSA) in the identification of prostatic artery origin. Of 34 vessels, 26 MR angiography identified origins (76.5%) were confirmed by DSA at the time of embolization. Although image postprocessing is required, the ability of MR angiography to accurately identify prostatic artery origins prior to embolization is useful in treatment planning and can obviate the need for separate computed tomographic angiography, thus reducing both radiation dose and time demand on patients.     

Angiographic Findings during Repeat Prostatic Artery Embolization

PurposeTo describe mechanisms of prostate revascularization based on imaging findings during repeat prostatic artery embolization (PAE; rPAE).Materials and MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of 10 rPAEs performed between October 2012 and September 2018 in patients with recurrent lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) after PAE (mean age, 68.2 y ± 4.5). Two interventional radiologists reviewed PAE and rPAE images and defined 6 patterns of revascularization. Correlation between embolization of the posterolateral (PL) prostatic branch during previous PAE and prostate revascularization on rPAE was assessed by Fisher exact test. One hemiprostate was excluded because no detectable revascularization was observed.ResultsAll patients showed LUTS improvement after previous PAEs (P < .01 for 5 outcome measures) and had recurrence during follow-up. rPAEs were performed a mean of 40.9 months after previous PAEs (18–96 mo). Of 19 hemiprostates analyzed, 11 presented revascularization by 2 or more branches (57.9%). The PL branch (29.0%) and the recanalized main prostatic artery (25.8%) were the most frequent revascularizing branches observed, followed by distal branches of obturator (12.9%), internal pudendal (12.9%), superior vesical (12.9%), and contralateral arteries (6.5%). Embolization of the PL branch during previous PAE significantly reduced the incidence of revascularization by this branch (P = .002).ConclusionsMechanisms of revascularization in rPAE are diverse and complex. Revascularization by the PL branch and recanalization of the previously embolized prostatic artery were the most frequent patterns observed. Embolization of the PL branch may reduce the incidence of prostate revascularization and LUTS recurrence after PAE.     

Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion Does Not Influence the Efficacy of Prostatic Artery Embolization

PurposeTo compare the outcomes of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with different intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) grades.Materials and MethodsThis retrospective single-center study included 128 patients (aged 50–86 years) who underwent PAE from 2013 to 2017. IPP grades were classified as follows: grade I (<10 mm), grade II (10–19 mm), and grade III (≥20 mm). Nineteen patients (14.8%) had grade I [mean IPP 7.8 mm, prostatic volume (PV) 64.1 cm³], 77 (60.2%) had grade II (mean IPP 14.9 mm, PV 87.0 cm³), and 32 (25%) had grade III (mean IPP 26.2 mm, PV 132.6 cm³), P < .01. The outcomes, including PV, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), and quality of life (QoL), were compared between the IPP grades at the 12-month follow-up. Clinical failure was defined as IPSS >7 or QoL >2.ResultsIPP decreased (I: ?8.2%, II: ?27.3%, and III: ?38.7%, P = .01), and all other endpoints improved (P < .01). Adjusted covariance analysis, considering baseline PV as a confounding factor, showed no correlation between the 12-month outcomes and baseline IPP. Clinical failure was observed in 17/128 patients (13.3%) and was similar in prevalence among the IPP groups (P = .20). Minor complications occurred in 43 patients (33.6%) and major in 3 (2.3%). There were statistical differences in the complications between IPP grades II and III (P < .01).ConclusionsPAE was similarly effective in all the IPP grades at the 12-month follow-up, and there was no difference in the clinical failure between the groups. Complications in IPP grade III were more frequent than those in IPP grade II.     

Initial Experience with Balloon-Occlusion Prostatic Artery Embolization

Twelve patients underwent balloon-occlusion prostatic artery embolization (PAE) at a single center. Bilateral prostatic artery catheterization was achieved in all patients, but unilateral embolization was performed in 1 patient as a result of the presence of a prostatic arteriovenous fistula. Mean International Prostate Symptom Score and quality-of-life score decreased by 15 ± 7 (P < .01) and 4 ± 1 (P < .01) points, respectively, over a mean follow-up period of 22 weeks ± 8. Only self-limiting minor complications were encountered. The initial experience with balloon-occlusion PAE suggests that it is technically feasible and can be performed safely.     

Rare Origin of the Prostatic Artery from the Lateral Sacral Artery

1. Download : Download high-res image (121KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Intra-vesical Prostatic Protrusion (IPP) Can Be Reduced by Prostatic Artery Embolization

Background

Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a new approach to improve lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia. PAE results in global reduction of prostate volume (PV). There are no data available on the efficacy of PAE in reducing intra-vesical prostatic protrusion (IPP), an anatomic feature that is clinically related with bladder outlet obstruction and LUTS.

Objective

To assess the results of PAE in patients with significant IPP due to median lobe hyperplasia and to compare the IPSS decrease and IPP change.

Material and Methods

Prospective analysis of 18 consecutive patients with significant IPP (>5 mm) related to median lobe hyperplasia undergoing PAE using 30–500-μm-calibrated trisacryl microspheres. We measured IPP on sagittal T2-weighted images before and 3 months after PAE. IPSS and clinical results were also evaluated at 3 months.

Results

PAE resulted in significant IPP reduction (1.57 cm ± 0.55 before PAE and 1.30 cm ± 0.46 after PAE, p = 0.0005) (Fig. 1) with no complication. IPSS, quality of life (QoL), total prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, and PV showed significant reduction after PAE, and maximum urinary flow rate (Q _max) showed significant increase after PAE. No significant change of International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) for clinical evaluation after PAE. A significant correlation was found between the IPP change and the IPSS change (r = 0.636, p = 0.0045).

Conclusion

Patients had significant IPP reduction as well as significant symptomatic improvement after PAE, and these improvements were positively correlated.

     

Nontarget Radiopaque Embolic Deposition during Prostatic Artery Embolization

This study evaluated detectable nontarget embolization (NTE) during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) and the safety and efficacy of using radiopaque particles in PAE. Ten patients aged >40 years with prostate glands of >50 mL and refractory lower urinary tract symptoms were analyzed. Unenhanced computed tomography scans at baseline and at 3 months after PAE, using 40–90-μm radiopaque spherical embolic beads, were compared to assess the NTE. Growth models evaluated changes from baseline to 3, 6, and 12 months in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), peak urine flow rate (Qmax), quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and postvoid residual (PVR). The IPSS, QoL, and Qmax improved at all time points (P < .05), with no trend in PVR or IIEF. Adverse events that occurred were minor. Radiographic NTE was seen in all patients, correlating at times with postprocedural symptoms (eg, rectal pain). Symptoms were not correlated with the NTE in some patients, whereas other patients remained asymptomatic despite NTE.     

前列腺动脉栓塞治疗高危前列腺增生症合并急性尿潴留

目的 评价前列腺动脉栓塞术(PAE)治疗高危前列腺增生症(BPH)合并急性尿潴留(AUR)的操作技术、疗效及安全性.方法 采用聚乙烯醇及明胶海绵颗粒栓塞患者前列腺动脉,观察患者术后排尿通畅情况,比较手术前后国际症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量评分(QOL)、前列腺体积变化情况.结果 24例患者中,23例成功接受栓塞治疗,12例患者术后1～2周内成功拔除尿管,在6～24个月随访中排尿保持通畅,有效率52.2％.术前、术后患者IPSS、QOL、前列腺体积分别为23.1±2.42、4.7 ±0.70、(124±7.21) cm3和17±2.11、2.3±0.61、(89±3.43) cm3,差别有统计学意义.无围手术期大出血、感染、死亡等严重并发症.结论 PAE治疗高危BPH伴尿潴留有一定疗效,是一种安全的治疗方法,但应注意选择适应证及手术技巧.