Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Department of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, University Health Network, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
BMC Urol. 2024 Jan 28;24(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12894-023-01397-1.
To summarize current evidence to report a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open simple prostatectomy (OSP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies published from inception until August 2021. The search terms used were (prostate embolization OR prostatic embolization) AND (prostatic hyperplasia OR prostatic obstruction) as well as the abbreviations of PAE and BPH. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for observational studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4.
Seven studies were included with 810 patients: five RCTs and one observational study compared PAE with TURP, and one observational study compared PAE with OSP. The included studies had considerable risk of bias concerns. TURP and OSP were associated with more statistically significant improvements in urodynamic measures and BPH symptoms compared to PAE. However, PAE seems to significantly improve erectile dysfunction compared to OSP and improve other outcome measures compared to TURP, although not significantly. PAE appeared to reduce adverse events and report more minor complications compared with TURP and OSP, but it is unclear whether PAE is more effective in the long-term.
PAE is an emerging treatment option for patients with symptomatic BPH who cannot undergo surgery or have undergone failed medical therapy. Overall, PAE groups reported fewer adverse events. Future ongoing and longer-term studies are needed to provide better insight into the benefit of PAE compared to other treatment options.
总结目前的证据,报告前列腺动脉栓塞术(PAE)与经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP)和开放性单纯前列腺切除术(OSP)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的比较系统评价和荟萃分析。
系统检索了从开始到 2021 年 8 月发表的研究。使用的检索词是(前列腺栓塞术或前列腺栓塞术)和(前列腺增生或前列腺梗阻)以及 PAE 和 BPH 的缩写。使用 Cochrane 随机对照试验风险偏倚工具(RCTs)和非随机干预研究风险偏倚工具(ROBINS-I)评估偏倚风险。使用 Revman 5.4 进行随机效应荟萃分析。
纳入了 7 项研究,共 810 例患者:5 项 RCT 和 1 项观察性研究比较了 PAE 与 TURP,1 项观察性研究比较了 PAE 与 OSP。纳入的研究存在较大的偏倚风险。与 PAE 相比,TURP 和 OSP 与尿动力学指标和 BPH 症状的统计学显著改善相关。然而,PAE 似乎与 OSP 相比显著改善勃起功能障碍,并与 TURP 相比改善其他结局指标,尽管无统计学意义。与 TURP 和 OSP 相比,PAE 似乎减少了不良事件并报告了更多的轻微并发症,但尚不清楚 PAE 在长期内是否更有效。
PAE 是一种治疗有症状的 BPH 患者的新兴治疗选择,这些患者不能接受手术或已经接受了失败的药物治疗。总体而言,PAE 组报告的不良事件较少。需要未来进行的长期研究来提供更好地了解 PAE 与其他治疗选择相比的益处。