ObjectiveTo compare prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in terms of patient reported and functional outcomes.DesignRandomised, open label, non-inferiority trial.SettingUrology and radiology departments of a Swiss tertiary care centre.Participants103 patients aged ≥40 years with refractory lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomised between 11 February 2014 and 24 May 2017; 48 and 51 patients reached the primary endpoint 12 weeks after PAE and TURP, respectively.InterventionsPAE performed with 250-400 μm microspheres under local anaesthesia versus monopolar TURP performed under spinal or general anaesthesia.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was change in international prostate symptoms score (IPSS) from baseline to 12 weeks after surgery; a difference of less than 3 points between treatments was defined as non-inferiority for PAE and tested with a one sided t test. Secondary outcomes included further questionnaires, functional measures, magnetic resonance imaging findings, and adverse events; changes from baseline to 12 weeks were compared between treatments with two sided tests for superiority.ResultsMean reduction in IPSS from baseline to 12 weeks was −9.23 points after PAE and −10.77 points after TURP. Although the difference was less than 3 points (1.54 points in favour of TURP (95% confidence interval −1.45 to 4.52)), non-inferiority of PAE could not be shown (P=0.17). None of the patient reported secondary outcomes differed significantly between treatments when tested for superiority; IPSS also did not differ significantly (P=0.31). At 12 weeks, PAE was less effective than TURP regarding changes in maximum rate of urinary flow (5.19 v 15.34 mL/s; difference 10.15 (95% confidence interval −14.67 to −5.63); P<0.001), postvoid residual urine (−86.36 v −199.98 mL; 113.62 (39.25 to 187.98); P=0.003), prostate volume (−12.17 v −30.27 mL; 18.11 (10.11 to 26.10); P<0.001), and desobstructive effectiveness according to pressure flow studies (56% v 93% shift towards less obstructive category; P=0.003). Fewer adverse events occurred after PAE than after TURP (36 v 70 events; P=0.003).ConclusionsThe improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia seen 12 weeks after PAE is close to that after TURP. PAE is associated with fewer complications than TURP but has disadvantages regarding functional outcomes, which should be considered when selecting patients. Further comparative study findings, including longer follow-up, should be evaluated before PAE can be considered as a routine treatment.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02054013.
In this 102 patient contemporary series of eEVAR for RAAA, endografting proved to be safe with a 30-day mortality of 13%. Key components of this favorable outcome result were adequate preoperative diagnostic imaging, hypotensive hemostasis, selective transfemoral supraceliac aortic balloon occlusion, predominantly local anesthesia, detection and treatment of ACS, and attention to logistics. Widespread adoption of these treatment components is recommended.
Hypertrophy after PVE is inversely correlated to initial FRL volume. Hypertrophy of the liver might be influenced by the systemic chemotherapeutic received before PVE.
The periscope and chimney graft technique provides a simpler, less invasive way to maintain blood flow to the renovisceral arteries during urgent endovascular aortic repairs. The very low 30-day mortality rate and the stability of the repairs in the midterm are encouraging. This technique has the potential to profoundly influence the treatment of acute aortic pathologies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.