The Effect of Protective Coil Embolization of Penile Anastomoses during Prostatic Artery Embolization on Erectile Function: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

PURPOSE: To explore whether coil embolization of penile collateral arteries to prevent nontarget embolization during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) negatively affects erectile function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained multicenter PAE database on all patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (January 2014 to July 2016). International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scores were collected at baseline and within 12 months after the procedure. A logistic regression and nearest neighbor propensity-matched analysis (matched for age, baseline IIEF-5 scores, and use of 5α-reductase inhibitors) and paired t test were used to evaluate for differential impact on IIEF-5 scores between the group of patients who underwent (unilateral) penile collateral coil embolization and a matched control group of patients who did not. RESULTS: Of a total of 216 patients, 26 underwent coil protection of an accessory pudendal vessel/penile collateral. After exclusions, 22 propensity-matched pairs were identified. The mean IIEF-5 score at baseline for the coil-embolized group was 14.8 ± 8.3 (out of a possible score of 30) and that for the matched control group was 14.0 ± 7.8. At the 12-month follow-up after the procedure, the mean follow-up IIEF-5 score was 15.5 ± 8.0 for the coil-embolized group and 14.2 ± 8.2 for the matched control group. The change in IIEF-5 scores after PAE was not significantly different between the 2 groups (0.66 ± 3.8 vs 0.20 ± 2.0; P = .64; 95% CI, -1.53 to 2.44). CONCLUSIONS: When penile collateral arteries were identified, protective coil embolization of penile collateral/accessory pudendal vessels during PAE was unlikely to affect erectile function negatively.

Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) have a Differential Impact on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS): Retrospective Analysis of the Multicentre UK-ROPE (UK Register of Prostate Embolization) Study.

PURPOSE: To compare the relative IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score) improvement in storage and voiding symptoms between prostatic artery embolization (PAE) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). METHOD: Retrospective analysis of the UK-ROPE (UK Register of Prostate Embolization) multicentre database was conducted with inclusion of all patients with full IPSS questionnaire score data. The voiding and storage subscore improvement was compared between interventions. Student's t-test (paired and unpaired) and ANOVA (Analysis of variance) were used to identify significant differences between the groups. RESULTS: 146 patients (121 PAE, 25 TURP) were included in the analysis. Storage symptoms were more frequently the most severe symptom ('storage' in 75 patients vs 'voiding' in 17 patients). Between groups, no significant difference was seen in raw storage subscore improvement (TURP 4.9 vs PAE 4.2; p = 0.34) or voiding subscore improvement (TURP 8.4 vs PAE 6.7; p = 0.1). ANOVA demonstrated a greater proportionate reduction (relative to total IPSS) towards voiding symptoms in the TURP group (27.3% TURP vs 9.9% PAE, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although both TURP and PAE improve voiding symptoms more than storage, a significantly larger proportion of total symptom reduction is due to voiding in the TURP cohort, with PAE providing a more balanced improvement between voiding and storage.