Improving Cone-Beam CT Angiography for Prostatic Artery Embolization: Is a Low-Dose Protocol Equivalent to the Standard?

PURPOSE: To compare the utility of low-dose versus standard cone-beam computed tomography (CT) angiography protocols in identifying nontarget embolization (NTE) during prostatic artery embolization (PAE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, single-center, Phase-1 study (NCT02592473) was conducted for lower urinary tract symptoms in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Prostate volume, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life score (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), peak flow rate, UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), and postvoid residual were recorded at baseline and 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24-months after PAE. Six-second (standard protocol, n = 29) or 5-second (low-dose protocol n = 45) rotations were made. Images were selected and matched in pairs by areas of NTE and compared by readers using a binomial generalized estimating equation model. Procedural outcomes were analyzed using a linear mixed model. RESULTS: Seventy-four cone-beam CT angiographies were performed in 21 patients. IPSS and QoL scores significantly improved (P <.05). There was no change in UCLA-PCI or IIEF scores. Dose area product of the low- and standard-dose protocol were 37,340.82 mGy·cm2 ± 104.66 and 62,645.66 mGy·cm2 ± 12,711.48, respectively, representing a dose reduction of 40.4%. A total of 120 comparisons showed no preference between the 2 protocols (P =.24). Observers identified 76 and 69 instances of NTE in the standard- and low-dose protocols, respectively (P =.125). CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose cone-beam CT angiography achieved equivalent clinical utility in identifying NTE during PAE, with the advantage of a lower radiation dose.

Use of and barriers to access to opioid analgesics: a worldwide, regional, and national study.

BACKGROUND: Despite opioid analgesics being essential for pain relief, use has been inadequate in many countries. We aim to provide up-to-date worldwide, regional, and national data for changes in opioid analgesic use, and to analyse the relation of impediments to use of these medicines. METHODS: We calculated defined daily doses for statistical purposes (S-DDD) per million inhabitants per day of opioid analgesics worldwide and for regions and countries from 2001 to 2013, and we used generalised estimating equation analysis to assess longitudinal change in use. We compared use data against the prevalence of some health disorders needing opioid use. We surveyed 214 countries or territories about impediments to availability of these medicines, and used regression analyses to establish the strength of associations between impediments and use. FINDINGS: The S-DDD of opioid analgesic use more than doubled worldwide between 2001-03 and 2011-13, from 1417 S-DDD (95% CI -732 to 3565; totalling about 3.01 billion defined daily doses per annum) to 3027 S-DDD (-1162 to 7215; totalling about 7.35 billion defined daily doses per annum). Substantial increases occurred in North America (16,046 S-DDD [95% CI 4032-28,061] to 31,453 S-DDD [8121-54,785]), western and central Europe (3079 S-DDD [1274-4883] to 9320 S-DDD [3969-14,672]), and Oceania (2275 S-DDD [763-3787] to 9136 S-DDD [2508-15,765]). Countries in other regions have shown no substantial increase in use. Impediments to use included an absence of training and awareness in medical professionals, fear of dependence, restricted financial resources, issues in sourcing, cultural attitudes, fear of diversion, international trade controls, and onerous regulation. Higher number of impediments reported was significantly associated with lower use (unadjusted incidence rate ratio 0.39 [95% CI 0.29-0.52]; p<0.0001), but not when adjusted for gross domestic product and human development index (0.91 [0.73-1.14]; p=0.4271). INTERPRETATION: Use of opioid analgesics has increased, but remains low in Africa, Asia, Central America, the Caribbean, South America, and eastern and southeastern Europe. Identified impediments to use urgently need to be addressed by governments and international agencies. FUNDING: International Narcotics Control Board, UN.