Published online Nov 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i32.11812
Peer-review started: August 5, 2022
First decision: September 23, 2022
Revised: September 28, 2022
Accepted: October 17, 2022
Article in press: October 17, 2022
Published online: November 16, 2022
Processing time: 94 Days and 20.2 Hours
Prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a promising minimally invasive therapy that improves lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) related to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) is the gold standard therapy for LUTS/BPH.
Although PAE is considered a therapeutic option for LUTS/BPH in the European Association of Urology guidelines and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, controversy persists regarding PAE in the treatment of LUTS/BPH.
A literature review was performed to identify all published articles on PAE vs TURP for LUTS/BPH. Sources included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library databases, and Chinese databases before June 2022. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted.
Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PAE compared with TURP, which may help urologists make better choices.
Eleven studies involving 1070 participants were included. Compared with the TURP group, the PAE group had a similar effect on the International Index of Erectile Function (IPSS) score, Peak urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual volume (PVR), Prostate volume (PV), prostatic specific antigen (PSA), The International Index of Erectile Function short form (IIEF-5) scores, and erectile dysfunction during 24 mo follow-up. Lower quality of life (QoL) score, lower rate of retrograde ejaculation and shorter hospital stay in the PAE group. A higher proportion of haematuria, urinary incontinence and urinary stricture was identified in the TURP group.
PAE may be an appropriate option for elderly patients, patients who are not candidates for surgery, and patients who do not want to risk the potential adverse effects of TURP.
Studies with large cases and long follow-up time are needed to validate results.