Shijian Feng1, Ye Tian2, Wei Liu3, Zirui Li1, Tuo Deng4, Hong Li1, Kunjie Wang5. 1. Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. 2. Department of Urology Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China. 3. Department of Cardiology, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, China. 4. Department of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. 5. Institute of Urology (Laboratory of Reconstructive Urology), Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. wangkj@scu.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficiency and safety of PAE treating moderate-to-severe LUTS related to BPH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane database of systematic review, and Web of Science, up to April 2016, to identify eligible studies. The Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.3 was used to analyze the extracted data. Random- or fixed-effect model was selected to fit the pooled out heterogeneity. RESULTS: 20 eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. Synthetic data showed that there were statistically significant improvements in IPSS (MD = -13.25; 95% CI -14.81 to -11.69; P < 0.00001), QoL score (MD = -2.34; 95% CI -2.69 to -2.00, P < 0.00001), PSA level (MD = -1.33; 95% CI -1.86 to -0.80; P < 0.00001), PV (MD = -28.00; 95% CI -35.94 to -20.07; P < 0.00001), Qmax (MD = 5.51; 95% CI 4.62 to 6.40; P < 0.00001), and PVR (MD = -67.8; 95% CI -81.35 to -53.60; P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in IIEF score (MD = 0.93; 95% CI 0.43-1.42; P = 0.07). Major complications following PAE include pain in the perineum, retropubic area, and/or urethra (9.4%), and hematuria (9.0%). CONCLUSIONS: PAE should be considered to be the very promising alternative treatment for those who do not want or cannot tolerate surgical treatment, with its benefits on IPSS, QoL score, PSA level, PV, Qmax, and PVR without affecting erectile function.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical efficiency and safety of PAE treating moderate-to-severe LUTS related to BPH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane database of systematic review, and Web of Science, up to April 2016, to identify eligible studies. The Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.3 was used to analyze the extracted data. Random- or fixed-effect model was selected to fit the pooled out heterogeneity. RESULTS: 20 eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. Synthetic data showed that there were statistically significant improvements in IPSS (MD = -13.25; 95% CI -14.81 to -11.69; P < 0.00001), QoL score (MD = -2.34; 95% CI -2.69 to -2.00, P < 0.00001), PSA level (MD = -1.33; 95% CI -1.86 to -0.80; P < 0.00001), PV (MD = -28.00; 95% CI -35.94 to -20.07; P < 0.00001), Qmax (MD = 5.51; 95% CI 4.62 to 6.40; P < 0.00001), and PVR (MD = -67.8; 95% CI -81.35 to -53.60; P < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in IIEF score (MD = 0.93; 95% CI 0.43-1.42; P = 0.07). Major complications following PAE include pain in the perineum, retropubic area, and/or urethra (9.4%), and hematuria (9.0%). CONCLUSIONS: PAE should be considered to be the very promising alternative treatment for those who do not want or cannot tolerate surgical treatment, with its benefits on IPSS, QoL score, PSA level, PV, Qmax, and PVR without affecting erectile function.
Authors: Gregory Amouyal; Louis Tournier; Constance de Margerie-Mellon; Damien Bouda; Atanas Pachev; Jessica Assouline; Cédric de Bazelaire; Florent Marques; Solenne Le Strat; François Desgrandchamps; Eric De Kerviler Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-07-14