Radiation Exposure and Uterine Artery Embolization: Current Risks and Risk Reduction

Tse, Gary; Spies, James B.

doi:10.1053/j.tvir.2010.03.002

Cited by 24 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study demonstrates that the estimated ovarian dose using 3D roadmap is no higher than when using conventional 2D roadmap and the calculated values are within safe limits with regard to potential deterministic effects to the ovaries and uterus (7). Additionally, the mean DAP and estimated ovarian doses in this study are in the same range as in previously published series using standard 2D angiography as summarized in Table 3.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

2D versus 3D roadmap for uterine artery catheterization: impact on several angiographic parameters

Maleux¹,

Michielsen

Timmerman

et al. 2014

Acta Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

2D versus 3D roadmap for uterine artery catheterization: impact on several angiographic parameters

Maleux¹,

Michielsen

Timmerman

et al. 2014

Acta Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stochastic effects, such as cancer induction, have not been assessed specifically for PAE. These effects are not considered substantial for other pelvic embolization procedures (64,65), and the male sex and more advanced age of the PAE recipient would further reduce this effect (66).…”

Section: Safety Of Paementioning

confidence: 99%

Society of Interventional Radiology Multisociety Consensus Position Statement on Prostatic Artery Embolization for Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: From the Society of Interventional Radiology, the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, Société Française de Radiologie, and the British Society of Interventional Radiology

McWilliams

Bilhim²,

Carnevale

et al. 2019

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

Self Cite

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BPH ¼ benign prostatic hyperplasia, IIEF ¼ International Index of Erectile Function, IPSS ¼ International Prostate Symptom Score, LUTS ¼ lower urinary tract symptoms, MIST ¼ minimally invasive surgical therapies, OP ¼ open prostatectomy, PAE ¼ prostatic artery embolization, PVR ¼ postvoid residual, QOL ¼ quality of life, RCT ¼ randomized controlled trial, TURP ¼ transurethral resection of the prostate, UK-ROPE ¼ United Kingdom Register of Prostate Embolization BACKGROUND Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) describes the proliferation of the glandular and stromal tissue in the transition zone of the prostate, which may result in bladder outlet obstruction and consequent lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The prevalence of BPH increases with age, affecting more than 70% of men older than 70 years (1), and one fourth of men older than 70 years have moderate to severe LUTS that impair their quality of life (QOL) (2,3). Thus, BPH and ensuing LUTS represent a significant health issue affecting millions of men. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS; also known as the American Urologic Association Symptom Index) is a validated instrument that quantifies a patient's subjective urinary symptoms on a 35-point scale (4). The IPSS also incorporates a urinary QOL score, which assesses how the patient feels overall about his urinary symptoms. Nearly all studies assessing BPH treatments for LUTS use the IPSS and QOL scores to assess patients before and after treatment. A 3-point change in IPSS is noticeable by a man with LUTS (5), and a 30% reduction in IPSS is considered clinically acceptable for a treatment to be considered effective (6,7). Medical therapies, including a-1 blockers and 5-a reductase inhibitors, are the mainstay of treatment for mild to moderate LUTS. The symptomatic relief is relatively modest, with IPSS improvement in the range of 3-7 points (8). Although generally considered safe, medical

show abstract

“…Several study groups have investigated the radiation dose applied during UAE and how its magnitude is affected by technical parameters [15]. Most of these studies were done using model estimates or investigating rather small patient populations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation Exposure During Uterine Artery Embolization: Effective Measures to Minimize Dose to the Patient

Scheurig-Muenkler

Powerski

Mueller

et al. 2014

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Radiation Exposure and Uterine Artery Embolization: Current Risks and Risk Reduction

Cited by 24 publications

References 15 publications

2D versus 3D roadmap for uterine artery catheterization: impact on several angiographic parameters

2D versus 3D roadmap for uterine artery catheterization: impact on several angiographic parameters

Radiation Exposure During Uterine Artery Embolization: Effective Measures to Minimize Dose to the Patient

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About