Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Radiol. Sep 28, 2024; 16(9): 380-388
Published online Sep 28, 2024. doi: 10.4329/wjr.v16.i9.380
Table 2 Comparison of technical and radiation dose-related features for the two groups (intentionally unilateral prostatic artery embolization group vs control)

IU-PAE (n = 13)
Control (n = 30)
P value
Operation time (mean ± SD, minutes)64.0 ± 20.2118.2 ± 22.6< 0.001a
Fluoroscopy time (mean ± SD, minutes)30.3 ± 10.647.3 ± 14.80.002a
DAP (mean ± SD, μGy∙m2) 9767.8 ± 5873.517891.5 ± 9087.10.004a
“PErFecTED” technique (proportion of pts)7/1314/300.667
Embo with 100-300 vs 300-500 (proportion of pts)10/323/70.984
MC advancement in contralateral side (proportion of pts)2/131/300.155