Teoh Jeremy Y C, Chiu Peter K F, Yee Chi-Hang, Wong Hon-Ming, Chan Chi-Kwok, Chan Eddie S Y, Hou Simon S M, Ng Chi-Fai
Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong, China.
S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, 4/F LCW Clinical Science Building, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China.
Int Urol Nephrol. 2017 Feb;49(2):197-203. doi: 10.1007/s11255-016-1461-2. Epub 2016 Nov 28.
We systemically reviewed the current evidence on prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in treating men with benign prostatic hyperplasia.
A systemic literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science on 1 May 2016 without time constraints. Outcomes of interest included the changes in the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality-of-life (QOL) score, peak urinary flow (Qmax), post-void residual urine (PVR), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) score, prostate volume (PV) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level.
A total of 987 records were identified through database searching. After removing duplicates, screening and reviewing full-length texts, a total of five records remained, with two randomized controlled trials and three non-randomized cohort studies. Transurethral resection of prostate resulted in better IPSS than PAE. Open prostatectomy had better IPSS, QOL score, Qmax and PVR, but worse IIEF score than PAE at 1 year. Unilateral PAE had higher rate of poor clinical outcome than bilateral PAE, but the difference became statistically insignificant after adjusting for age; IPSS, QOL score, Qmax, PVR, IIEF score, PV and PSA did not differ between the two groups. PAE with 100 μm PVA particles resulted in greater reduction in PSA level, but worse IIEF score than PAE with 200 μm PVA particles; IPSS, QOL score, Qmax, PVR, PV and poor clinical outcome did not differ between the two groups.
Evidence on different aspects of PAE was limited. Further studies are warranted to investigate the role of PAE as compared to other forms of medical and surgical treatment.
我们系统回顾了目前关于前列腺动脉栓塞术(PAE)治疗良性前列腺增生男性患者的证据。
于2016年5月1日在PubMed、EMBASE和Web of Science上进行了无时间限制的系统文献检索。感兴趣的结果包括国际前列腺症状评分(IPSS)、生活质量(QOL)评分、最大尿流率(Qmax)、残余尿量(PVR)、国际勃起功能指数(IIEF)评分、前列腺体积(PV)和前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)水平的变化。
通过数据库检索共识别出987条记录。在去除重复记录、筛选和审查全文后,共保留了5条记录,其中包括2项随机对照试验和3项非随机队列研究。经尿道前列腺切除术在IPSS方面的效果优于PAE。开放性前列腺切除术在1年时的IPSS、QOL评分、Qmax和PVR方面较好,但IIEF评分比PAE差。单侧PAE的临床不良结局发生率高于双侧PAE,但在调整年龄后差异无统计学意义;两组之间的IPSS、QOL评分、Qmax、PVR、IIEF评分、PV和PSA无差异。使用100μm PVA颗粒的PAE在PSA水平降低方面效果更显著,但IIEF评分比使用200μm PVA颗粒的PAE差;两组之间的IPSS、QOL评分、Qmax、PVR、PV和临床不良结局无差异。
关于PAE不同方面的证据有限。有必要进一步研究以探讨PAE与其他药物和手术治疗形式相比的作用。