Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Fachpsychotherapie Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende Patientenratgeber
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
Erschienen in:

18.01.2022 | Review

Minimally Invasive Therapies for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Review of Currently Available Techniques Including Prostatic Artery Embolization, Water Vapor Thermal Therapy, Prostatic Urethral Lift, Temporary Implantable Nitinol Device and Aquablation

verfasst von: Tiago Bilhim, Patrick Betschart, Pavel Lyatoshinsky, Gautier Müllhaupt, Dominik Abt

Erschienen in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology | Ausgabe 4/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

A 66-years old male patient presents with lower urinary tract symptoms, mostly due to obstructive symptoms, and an enlarged prostate with 80 cm3, with a broad-based median lobe, suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) was proposed. However, the patient desired to preserve ejaculatory function and was afraid of a potential negative impact on erectile function. Thus, the patient inquired about minimally invasive therapies (MITs) as alternatives to TURP. In this review, currently available MITs for BPO are described including prostatic artery embolization, water vapor thermal therapy (Rezum®), prostatic urethral lift, iTIND® (temporary implantable device) and aquablation (Aquabeam®). Focus is given on the description of the technique, level of evidence and advantages over conventional surgical options.
Literatur
1.
Sun F, Crisóstomo V, Báez-Díaz C, Sánchez FM. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): part 2, insights into the technical rationale. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016;39(2):161–9.PubMed
2.
Martins Pisco J, Pereira J, Rio Tinto H, Fernandes L, Bilhim T. How to perform prostatic arterial embolization. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012;15(4):286–9.PubMed
3.
Powell T, Bhatia S, Ayyagari R. Current debates regarding optimal patient evaluation and procedural technique for prostatic artery embolization. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020;23(3):100696.PubMed
4.
Bilhim T, Pisco JM, Rio Tinto H, et al. Prostatic arterial supply: anatomic and imaging findings relevant for selective arterial embolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012;23(11):1403–15.PubMed
5.
Sun F, Lucas-Cava V, Sánchez-Margallo FM. Clinical predictive factors in prostatic artery embolization for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia: a comprehensive review. Transl Androl Urol. 2020;9(4):1754–68.PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Bilhim T, Pisco J, Pereira JA, et al. Predictors of clinical outcome after prostate artery embolization with spherical and nonspherical polyvinyl alcohol particles in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Radiology. 2016;281(1):289–300.PubMed
7.
Madersbacher S, Roehrborn CG, Oelke M. The role of novel minimally invasive treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. BJU Int. 2020;126(3):317–26.PubMed
8.
Svarc P, Taudorf M, Nielsen MB, Stroomberg HV, Røder MA, Lönn L. Postembolization syndrome after prostatic artery embolization: a systematic review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10(9):659.
9.
Zumstein V, Binder J, Güsewell S, et al. Radiation exposure during prostatic artery embolisation: a systematic review and calculation of associated risks. Eur Urol Focus. 2020;4569(20):30111–5.
10.
11.
Pisco JM, Bilhim T, Costa NV, et al. Randomised clinical trial of prostatic artery embolisation versus a sham procedure for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Eur Urol. 2020;77(3):354–62.PubMed
12.
Knight GM, Talwar A, Salem R, Mouli S. Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing prostatic artery embolization to gold-standard transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2021;44(2):183–93.PubMed
13.
Jung JH, McCutcheon KA, Borofsky M, et al. Prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;19(12):012867.
14.
Pisco JM, Bilhim T, Pinheiro LC, et al. Medium- and long-term outcome of prostate artery embolization for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: results in 630 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(8):1115–22.PubMed
15.
16.
17.
Cornelis FH, Bilhim T, Hacking N, Sapoval M, Tapping CR, Carnevale FC. CIRSE standards of practice on prostatic artery embolisation. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020;43(2):176–85.PubMed
18.
McWilliams JP, Bilhim TA, Carnevale FC, et al. Society of interventional radiology multisociety consensus position statement on prostatic artery embolization for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: from the society of interventional radiology, the cardiovascular and interventional radiological society of Europe, société française de radiologie, and the British society of interventional radiology: endorsed by the Asia pacific society of cardiovascular and interventional radiology, Canadian association for interventional radiology, Chinese college of interventionalists, interventional radiology society of Australasia, Japanese society of interventional radiology, and Korean society of interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2019;30(5):627–37.PubMed
19.
20.
Lokeshwar SD, Valancy D, Lima TFN, Blachman-Braun R, Ramasamy R. A Systematic review of reported ejaculatory dysfunction in clinical trials evaluating minimally invasive treatment modalities for BPH. Curr Urol Rep. 2020;21(12):54.PubMed
21.
Lebdai S, Chevrot A, Doizi S, et al. Do patients have to choose between ejaculation and miction? a systematic review about ejaculation preservation technics for benign prostatic obstruction surgical treatment. World J Urol. 2019;37(2):299–308.PubMed
22.
Wong T, Tembelis M, Acharya V, Hoffmann JC. Prostatic artery embolization and sexual function: literature review and comparison to other urologic interventions. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020;23(3):100693.PubMed
23.
Ng BHS, Chung E. A state-of-art review on the preservation of sexual function among various minimally invasive surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: impact on erectile and ejaculatory domains. Investig Clin Urol. 2021;62(2):148–58.PubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Arezki A, Sadri I, Couture F, et al. Reasons to go for Rezum steam therapy: an effective and durable outpatient minimally invasive procedure. World J Urol. 2021;39:2307.PubMed
25.
26.
McVary KT, Rogers T, Roehrborn CG. Rezum water vapor thermal therapy for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia: 4-year results from randomized controlled study. Urology. 2019;126:171.PubMed
27.
Darson MF, Alexander EE, Schiffman ZJ, et al. Procedural techniques and multicenter postmarket experience using minimally invasive convective radiofrequency thermal therapy with Rezum system for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Res Rep Urol. 2017;9:159.PubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Mollengarden D, Goldberg K, Wong D, et al. Convective radiofrequency water vapor thermal therapy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a single office experience. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2018;21:379.PubMed
29.
Dixon CM, Cedano ER, Pacik D, et al. Two-year results after convective radiofrequency water vapor thermal therapy of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Res Rep Urol. 2016;8:207.PubMedPubMedCentral
30.
Foster HE, Dahm P, Kohler TS, et al. Surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA guideline amendment 2019. J Urol. 2019;202:592.PubMed
31.
Sievert KD, Schonthaler M, Berges R, et al. Minimally invasive prostatic urethral lift (PUL) efficacious in TURP candidates: a multicenter German evaluation after 2 years. World J Urol. 2019;37:1353.PubMed
32.
Roehrborn CG, Rukstalis DB, Barkin J, et al. Three year results of the prostatic urethral LIFT study. Can J Urol. 2015;22:7772.PubMed
33.
Magistro G, Chapple CR, Elhilali M, et al. Emerging minimally invasive treatment options for male lower urinary tract symptoms. Eur Urol. 2017;72:986.PubMed
34.
Roehrborn CG, Barkin J, Gange SN, et al. Five year results of the prospective randomized controlled prostatic urethral LIFT study. Can J Urol. 2017;24:8802.PubMed
35.
Gratzke C, Barber N, Speakman MJ, et al. Prostatic urethral lift vs transurethral resection of the prostate: 2-year results of the BPH6 prospective, multicentre, randomized study. 2016 BJU Int. 2017;119:767.PubMed
36.
Roehrborn CG, Gange SN, Shore ND, et al. The prostatic urethral lift for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with prostate enlargement due to benign prostatic hyperplasia: the LIFT study. J Urol. 2013;190:2161.PubMed
37.
Jing J, Wu Y, Du M, et al. Urethral lift as a safe and effective procedure for prostatic hyplasia population: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Surg. 2020;7:598728.PubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Tzeng M, Basourakos SP, Lewicki PJ, et al. New endoscopic in-office surgical therapies for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. Eur Urol Focus. 2021;5:741.
39.
Rukstalis D, Grier D, Stroup SP, et al. Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) for obstructive median lobes: 12 month results of the MedLift Study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2019;22:411.PubMed
40.
Magistro G, Stief CG, Woo HH. Mini-review: what is new in urolift? Eur Urol Focus. 2018;4:36.PubMed
41.
Amparore D, De Cillis S, Volpi G, et al. First- and second-generation temporary implantable nitinol devices as minimally invasive treatments for BPH-related LUTS: systematic review of the literature. Curr Urol Rep. 2019;20:47.PubMed
42.
Elterman D, Gao B, Zorn KC, et al. How i do it: temporarily implanted nitinol device (iTind). Can J Urol. 2021;28:10788.PubMed
43.
Amparore D, Fiori C, Valerio M, et al. 3-Year results following treatment with the second generation of the temporary implantable nitinol device in men with LUTS secondary to benign prostatic obstruction. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2021;24:349.PubMed
44.
De Nunzio C, Cantiello F, Fiori C, et al. Urinary and sexual function after treatment with temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 6-month interim results of the MT-06-study. World J Urol. 2021;39:2037.PubMed
45.
Chughtai B, Elterman D, Shore N, et al. The iTind temporarily implanted nitinol device for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia: a multicenter, randomized. Controll Trial Urol. 2021;153:270.
46.
Gilling P, Reuther R, Kahokehr A, et al. Aquablation - image-guided robot-assisted waterjet ablation of the prostate: initial clinical experience. BJU Int. 2016;117:923.PubMed
47.
Nguyen DD, Mantri SS, Zorn KC, et al. Which anatomic structures should be preserved during aquablation contour planning to optimize ejaculatory function? a case-control study using ultrasound video recordings to identify surgical predictors of postoperative anejaculation. Urology. 2021;2:41.
48.
Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, et al. WATER: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial of aquablation((R)) vs transurethral resection of the prostate in benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2018;199:1252.PubMed
49.
Gilling P, Barber N, Bidair M, et al. Three-year outcomes after Aquablation therapy compared to TURP: results from a blinded randomized trial. Can J Urol. 2020;27:10072.PubMed
50.
Bach T, Giannakis I, Bachmann A, et al. Aquablation of the prostate: single-center results of a non-selected, consecutive patient cohort. World J Urol. 2019;37:1369.PubMed
51.
Desai M, Bidair M, Bhojani N, et al. Aquablation for benign prostatic hyperplasia in large prostates (80–150 cc): 2-year results. Can J Urol. 2020;27:10147.PubMed
52.
Elterman DS, Foller S, Ubrig B, et al. Focal bladder neck cautery associated with low rate of post-Aquablation bleeding. Can J Urol. 2021;28:10610.PubMed
53.
54.
Metadaten
Titel
Minimally Invasive Therapies for Benign Prostatic Obstruction: A Review of Currently Available Techniques Including Prostatic Artery Embolization, Water Vapor Thermal Therapy, Prostatic Urethral Lift, Temporary Implantable Nitinol Device and Aquablation
verfasst von
Tiago Bilhim
Patrick Betschart
Pavel Lyatoshinsky
Gautier Müllhaupt
Dominik Abt
Publikationsdatum
18.01.2022
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology / Ausgabe 4/2022
Print ISSN: 0174-1551
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-086X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-021-03052-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2022

CT-Guided Femoral Approach for Psoas Muscle Abscess Drainage

  • Technical Note

Commentary on Ethanol Embolization of Nasal Arteriovenous Malformations: A Ten-Year, Single Institution Experience

  • Commentary

Ethanol Embolization of Nasal Arteriovenous Malformations: A 10-Year, Single-Institution Experience

  • Clinical Investigation

Randomized Phase 3 LEAP-012 Study: Transarterial Chemoembolization With or Without Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab for Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma Not Amenable to Curative Treatment

  • Open Access
  • Study Protocol

A Leap from TACE to TACE Potentiated by Immune Response Modulation and Angiogenesis Inhibition for Patients with Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: LEAP-012 Phase 3 Randomized Control Trial Protocol

  • Commentary

Recent Updates in Gastrointestinal Stent Placement from the Esophagus to the Colon: A Radiological Perspective

  • Review

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Ringen um den richtigen Umgang mit Zufallsbefunden

Wenn 2026 in Deutschland das Lungenkrebsscreening mittels Low-Dose-Computertomografie (LDCT) eingeführt wird, wird es auch viele Zufallsbefunde ans Licht bringen. Das birgt Chancen und Risiken.

Bald 5% der Krebserkrankungen durch CT verursacht

Die jährlich rund 93 Millionen CTs in den USA könnten künftig zu über 100.000 zusätzlichen Krebserkrankungen führen, geht aus einer Modellrechnung hervor. Damit würde eine von 20 Krebserkrankungen auf die ionisierende Strahlung bei CT-Untersuchungen zurückgehen.

Röntgen-Thorax oder LDCT fürs Lungenscreening nach HNSCC?

Personen, die an einem Plattenepithelkarzinom im Kopf-Hals-Bereich erkrankt sind, haben ein erhöhtes Risiko für Metastasen oder zweite Primärmalignome der Lunge. Eine Studie hat untersucht, wie die radiologische Überwachung aussehen sollte.

Statine: Was der G-BA-Beschluss für Praxen bedeutet

Nach dem G-BA-Beschluss zur erweiterten Verordnungsfähigkeit von Lipidsenkern rechnet die DEGAM mit 200 bis 300 neuen Dauerpatienten pro Praxis. Im Interview erläutert Präsidiumsmitglied Erika Baum, wie Hausärztinnen und Hausärzte am besten vorgehen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise