No abstract

Background Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has recently been described as a promising alternative treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to an enlarged, benign prostate. Purpose To evaluate the safety, morbidity, and functional outcomes after PAE. Material and Methods Twenty-nine consecutive patients were included. All patients had computed tomography angiography before the procedure. Microcatheters were used for selective embolization of the PAs. Large side branches to non-target organs were embolized with coils. The PAs were embolized with calibrated 300–500 µm tris-acryl gelatin microspheres. Complications were recorded before discharge. Clinical visit was performed after three months, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after 6–12 months, and any further intervention recorded in the chart. Mean follow-up was 23 months. Clinical success was defined as no longer needing urinary catheter, no long-term complications, and no need of further interventions. Results Sixteen patients (55%) had permanent or intermittent catheter before the procedure. Bilateral embolization was performed in 26 patients (90%). Five patients underwent two procedures. Twelve of 16 patients (75%) with permanent or intermittent catheter were able to remove the catheter. Five patients were operated with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Except for one patient, all patients without catheter at baseline improved in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and had no further treatment. Twelve patients experienced complications; all were grade 1 according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. Conclusion PAE reduced LUTS symptoms in most patients without severe complications. The treatment did not exclude additional surgical treatment when needed.

Purpose To evaluate whether an arterial phase scan improves the diagnostic performance of computed tomography to identify pelvic trauma patients who received angiographic intervention on demand of the trauma surgeon. Methods This retrospective single-center study was performed at an academic Scandinavian trauma center with approximately 2000 trauma admissions annually. Pelvic trauma patients with arterial and portal venous phase CT from 2009 to 2015 were included. The patients were identified from the institutional trauma registry. Images were interpreted by two radiologists with more than 10 years of trauma radiology experience. Positive findings for extravasation on portal venous phase alone or on both arterial and portal venous phase were compared, with angiographic intervention as clinical outcome. Results One hundred fifty-seven patients (54 females, 103 males) with a median age of 45 years were enrolled. Sixteen patients received angiographic intervention. Positive CT findings on portal venous phase only had a sensitivity and specificity of 62% and 86%, vs. 56% and 93% for simultaneous findings on arterial and portal venous phase. Specificity was significantly higher for positive findings in both phases compared with portal venous phase only. Applying a threshold > 0.9 cm of extravasation diameter to portal venous phase only resulted in sensitivity and specificity identical to those of both phases. Conclusion Arterial phase scan in addition to portal venous phase scan did not improve patient selection for angiography. Portal venous phase extravasation size alone may be used as an imaging-based biomarker of the need for angiographic intervention.