Prostatic Artery Embolization vs. Conventional Transurethral Prostatectomy in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Prostatic Artery Embolization vs. Conventional Transurethral Prostatectomy in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Prospective Randomized Trial

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a prevalent entity, affecting over 50% of men older than 60 years. The clinical picture of the disease includes lower urinary tract symptoms such as interrupted and weak urinary stream, nocturia, urgency and leaking and even sexual dysfunction in some individuals. Medical therapy is usually the first-line treatment. However, the efficacy of drugs like alpha-blockers is limited, and as disease progresses more invasive treatment options have to be taken into consideration. In cases with moderate to severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) transurethral resection of the prostate (TUR-P) is the standard treatment. TURP, however, is limited to prostates smaller than 60-80ml and the procedure is associated with a complication rate. The cumulative short-term morbidity rate is around 11% and the necessity for surgical revision is as high as 6%. Bleeding requiring transfusions and transurethral resection syndrome represent potentially serious threats to elderly and frail patients. Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has been suggested as a minimal invasive alternative procedure, which can be performed in an outpatient setting with rapid recovery and low morbidity. The investigators hypothesize that PAE is non-inferior in the treatment of symptomatic BPH compared to conventional and established TUR-P.

Prostatic Artery Embolization vs. Conventional Transurethral Prostatectomy in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Recruitment

Summary

Participation Requirements

Description

Tracking Information