Comparison of water vapor thermal therapy and prostate artery embolization for fragile patients with indwelling urinary catheters: Preliminary results from a multi-institutional study.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To report our preliminary experience with water vapor thermal therapy with the Rezum™ System and Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) for treatment of medically refractory, complete urinary retention to achieve successful cessation of catheter dependency in frail-patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multi-institutional study was conducted including all patients who underwent Rezum™ procedure and PAE between October 2017 and June 2020. The included population focused on frail-patients unsuitable for conventional surgery with complete urinary retention. Rezum™ patients were identified and matched (11) with patients who underwent PAE. The matching criteria were age, Charlson score, prostate volume and duration of follow-up. The primary outcome was catheter-free survival, defined as spontaneous voiding and release from catheter dependence. RESULTS: Eleven patients from the Rezum™ group were matched to 11 embolized patients. PAE and Rezum™ patients were comparable in age (median 77 vs. 75 years), Charlson score (median 6 vs. 6) and prostate volume (74 vs. 60 cc). Procedures were significantly longer in the PAE group compared to the Rezum™ procedures (median 148 vs. 8min, P<0.001). After a median follow-up of 12 months, spontaneous voiding was conserved in all cases (100%) after the Rezum™ procedure and in 5 cases (45.4%) after PAE (P=0.01). In catheter-free patients, the rate of benign prostatic hyperplasia medication use after procedure was 40% for PAE and 18.2% for Rezum™ patients (P=0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary experience for treatment of complete urinary retention in frail-patients shows the feasibility of PAE and Rezum™ to restore spontaneous urination without being associated with the occurrence of major complications. Early data suggests that Rezum™ may provide superior results in terms of cessation of catheter dependence. Future studies are needed to definitively assess which treatment would be best suited for each patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 3.