Back to Journals » Research and Reports in Urology » Volume 10

Prostatic artery embolization versus transurethral resection of the prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: protocol for a non-inferiority clinical trial

Authors Napal Lecumberri S, Insausti Gorbea I, Sáez de Ocariz García A, Solchaga Álvarez S, Cebrián Lostal JL, Monreal Beortegui R, Giral Villalta PJ, Urtasun Grijalba F

Received 7 April 2017

Accepted for publication 4 September 2017

Published 13 February 2018 Volume 2018:10 Pages 17—22


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Jan Colli

Saturnino Napal Lecumberri,1 Iñigo Insausti Gorbea,2 Ana Sáez de Ocáriz García,2 Saioa Solchaga Álvarez,2 José Luis Cebrián Lostal,1 Raquel Monreal Beortegui,2 Pedro José Giral Villalta,1 Fermín Urtasun Grijalba2

1Servicio de Urología, 2Sección de Radiología Vascular Intervencionista, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain

Background: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a prevalent disease associated with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The standard of care for moderate-to-severe LUTS unresponsive to pharmacological treatment is the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). However, this intervention is not exempt from complications. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has been described as a new, effective and safe procedure for the treatment of LUTS secondary to BPH. To date, only one clinical trial has been published on the use of PAE for LUTS, but the study was methodologically flawed in terms of safety monitoring. Therefore, well-designed clinical studies are required to compare the efficacy and safety of both techniques in the treatment of LUTS secondary to BPH.
Methods and design: This was a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing efficacy and safety of PAE and TURP in the treatment of BPH-related LUTS. A total of 60 patients diagnosed with BPH with obstructive moderate or severe LUTS refractory to medical therapy and candidates for TURP were randomized to either PAE or TURP. The presence and severity of LUTS were assessed using the validated Spanish version of the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). Primary end points included improvement in maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) as measured at baseline and 1 year after the intervention. Improvement in IPSS as measured at baseline and after the intervention, reduction in prostate volume, no deterioration or improvement of sexual function (International Index of Erectile Function [IIEF]), reduction in PSA and PVR, satisfaction of the patient with the operation and adverse events occurring during the study were secondary outcome measures.
Discussion: The aim of this clinical study was to investigate whether PAE is a valid therapeutic option for LUTS that is not inferior to TURP in terms of efficacy and safety. This study also helped to define the profile of candidates for PAE and analyzed the benefits and complications associated with this new technique.

Keywords: benign prostatic hyperplasia, lower urinary tract symptoms, transurethral resection of the prostate, prostatic artery embolization, clinical trial

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]