Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Radiologia Brasileira (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-39842022000100006 |
Resumo: | Abstract Objective: To describe the efficacy and safety of protective embolization during prostatic artery embolization, as well as to discuss its clinical relevance. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, single-center study including 39 patients who underwent prostatic artery embolization to treat lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia between June 2008 and March 2018. Follow-up evaluations, performed at 3 and 12 months after the procedure, included determination of the International Prostate Symptom Score, a quality of life score, and prostate-specific antigen levels, as well as ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and uroflowmetry. Results: Protective embolization was performed in 45 arteries: in the middle rectal artery in 19 (42.2%); in the accessory internal pudendal artery in 11 (24.4%); in an internal pudendal artery anastomosis in 10 (22.2%); in the superior vesical artery in four (8.9%); and in the obturator artery in one (2.2%). There was one case of nontarget embolization leading to a penile ulcer, which was attributed to reflux of microspheres to an unprotected artery. There were no complications related to the protected branches. All of the patients showed significant improvement in all of the outcomes studied (p < 0.05), and none reported worsening of sexual function during follow-up. Conclusion: Protective embolization can reduce nontarget embolization during prostatic artery embolization without affecting the results of the procedure. In addition, no adverse events other than those expected or previously reported were observed. Therefore, protective embolization of pudendal region is safe. |
id |
CBR-1_2fa89960e14935f507f976a89dcee1c8 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0100-39842022000100006 |
network_acronym_str |
CBR-1 |
network_name_str |
Radiologia Brasileira (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolizationProstateProstatic hyperplasiaEmbolization, therapeutic/methodsErectile dysfunctionAbstract Objective: To describe the efficacy and safety of protective embolization during prostatic artery embolization, as well as to discuss its clinical relevance. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, single-center study including 39 patients who underwent prostatic artery embolization to treat lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia between June 2008 and March 2018. Follow-up evaluations, performed at 3 and 12 months after the procedure, included determination of the International Prostate Symptom Score, a quality of life score, and prostate-specific antigen levels, as well as ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and uroflowmetry. Results: Protective embolization was performed in 45 arteries: in the middle rectal artery in 19 (42.2%); in the accessory internal pudendal artery in 11 (24.4%); in an internal pudendal artery anastomosis in 10 (22.2%); in the superior vesical artery in four (8.9%); and in the obturator artery in one (2.2%). There was one case of nontarget embolization leading to a penile ulcer, which was attributed to reflux of microspheres to an unprotected artery. There were no complications related to the protected branches. All of the patients showed significant improvement in all of the outcomes studied (p < 0.05), and none reported worsening of sexual function during follow-up. Conclusion: Protective embolization can reduce nontarget embolization during prostatic artery embolization without affecting the results of the procedure. In addition, no adverse events other than those expected or previously reported were observed. Therefore, protective embolization of pudendal region is safe.Publicação do Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem2022-02-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-39842022000100006Radiologia Brasileira v.55 n.1 2022reponame:Radiologia Brasileira (Online)instname:Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem (CBR)instacron:CBR10.1590/0100-3984.2021.0021info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPilan,Bruna FerreiraAssis,André Moreira deMoreira,Airton MotaRodrigues,Vanessa Cristina de PaulaCarnevale,Francisco Cesareng2022-02-07T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0100-39842022000100006Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/rb/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpradiologiabrasileira@cbr.org.br1678-70990100-3984opendoar:2022-02-07T00:00Radiologia Brasileira (Online) - Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem (CBR)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
title |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
spellingShingle |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization Pilan,Bruna Ferreira Prostate Prostatic hyperplasia Embolization, therapeutic/methods Erectile dysfunction |
title_short |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
title_full |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
title_fullStr |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
title_full_unstemmed |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
title_sort |
Protection of nontarget structures in prostatic artery embolization |
author |
Pilan,Bruna Ferreira |
author_facet |
Pilan,Bruna Ferreira Assis,André Moreira de Moreira,Airton Mota Rodrigues,Vanessa Cristina de Paula Carnevale,Francisco Cesar |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Assis,André Moreira de Moreira,Airton Mota Rodrigues,Vanessa Cristina de Paula Carnevale,Francisco Cesar |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pilan,Bruna Ferreira Assis,André Moreira de Moreira,Airton Mota Rodrigues,Vanessa Cristina de Paula Carnevale,Francisco Cesar |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Prostate Prostatic hyperplasia Embolization, therapeutic/methods Erectile dysfunction |
topic |
Prostate Prostatic hyperplasia Embolization, therapeutic/methods Erectile dysfunction |
description |
Abstract Objective: To describe the efficacy and safety of protective embolization during prostatic artery embolization, as well as to discuss its clinical relevance. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, single-center study including 39 patients who underwent prostatic artery embolization to treat lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic hyperplasia between June 2008 and March 2018. Follow-up evaluations, performed at 3 and 12 months after the procedure, included determination of the International Prostate Symptom Score, a quality of life score, and prostate-specific antigen levels, as well as ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and uroflowmetry. Results: Protective embolization was performed in 45 arteries: in the middle rectal artery in 19 (42.2%); in the accessory internal pudendal artery in 11 (24.4%); in an internal pudendal artery anastomosis in 10 (22.2%); in the superior vesical artery in four (8.9%); and in the obturator artery in one (2.2%). There was one case of nontarget embolization leading to a penile ulcer, which was attributed to reflux of microspheres to an unprotected artery. There were no complications related to the protected branches. All of the patients showed significant improvement in all of the outcomes studied (p < 0.05), and none reported worsening of sexual function during follow-up. Conclusion: Protective embolization can reduce nontarget embolization during prostatic artery embolization without affecting the results of the procedure. In addition, no adverse events other than those expected or previously reported were observed. Therefore, protective embolization of pudendal region is safe. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-02-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-39842022000100006 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-39842022000100006 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/0100-3984.2021.0021 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Publicação do Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Publicação do Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Radiologia Brasileira v.55 n.1 2022 reponame:Radiologia Brasileira (Online) instname:Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem (CBR) instacron:CBR |
instname_str |
Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem (CBR) |
instacron_str |
CBR |
institution |
CBR |
reponame_str |
Radiologia Brasileira (Online) |
collection |
Radiologia Brasileira (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Radiologia Brasileira (Online) - Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem (CBR) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
radiologiabrasileira@cbr.org.br |
_version_ |
1754208941080838144 |