The effect of protective coil embolization of penile anastomoses during prostatic artery embolization on erectile function: a propensity-matched analysis
The effect of protective coil embolization of penile anastomoses during prostatic artery embolization on erectile function: a propensity-matched analysis
Purpose: To explore whether coil embolization of penile collateral arteries to prevent nontarget embolization during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) negatively affects erectile function. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained multicenter PAE database on all patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (January 2014 to July 2016). International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scores were collected at baseline and within 12 months after the procedure. A logistic regression and nearest neighbor propensity-matched analysis (matched for age, baseline IIEF-5 scores, and use of 5α-reductase inhibitors) and paired t test were used to evaluate for differential impact on IIEF-5 scores between the group of patients who underwent (unilateral) penile collateral coil embolization and a matched control group of patients who did not. Results: Of a total of 216 patients, 26 underwent coil protection of an accessory pudendal vessel/penile collateral. After exclusions, 22 propensity-matched pairs were identified. The mean IIEF-5 score at baseline for the coil-embolized group was 14.8 ± 8.3 (out of a possible score of 30) and that for the matched control group was 14.0 ± 7.8. At the 12-month follow-up after the procedure, the mean follow-up IIEF-5 score was 15.5 ± 8.0 for the coil-embolized group and 14.2 ± 8.2 for the matched control group. The change in IIEF-5 scores after PAE was not significantly different between the 2 groups (0.66 ± 3.8 vs 0.20 ± 2.0; P = .64; 95% CI, -1.53 to 2.44). Conclusions: When penile collateral arteries were identified, protective coil embolization of penile collateral/accessory pudendal vessels during PAE was unlikely to affect erectile function negatively.
218 - 224.e1
Maclean, Drew
bf15fb9d-aa6d-4d13-8cae-ede6a3329779
Vigneswaran, Ganesh
4e3865ad-1a15-4a27-b810-55348e7baceb
Maher, Benjamin
7fd9ad94-486a-412f-a88e-5db922b49617
Hadi, Mohammed
098f3cf9-e312-4e54-bf7f-797c6cbea7a6
Harding, James
7b118a0a-f936-47cf-9184-5958d5b5ae08
Harris, Mark
065415f3-96a7-443c-91b4-f75a5945f82b
Bryant, Timothy
05bd12ef-e864-450e-96f5-addcc60c173d
Hacking, Nigel
fdc70f9c-e9d6-485c-a53d-e6988fa75cb0
Modi, Sachin
caef086a-dda5-418a-ada8-fc042e6e0b18
February 2023
Maclean, Drew
bf15fb9d-aa6d-4d13-8cae-ede6a3329779
Vigneswaran, Ganesh
4e3865ad-1a15-4a27-b810-55348e7baceb
Maher, Benjamin
7fd9ad94-486a-412f-a88e-5db922b49617
Hadi, Mohammed
098f3cf9-e312-4e54-bf7f-797c6cbea7a6
Harding, James
7b118a0a-f936-47cf-9184-5958d5b5ae08
Harris, Mark
065415f3-96a7-443c-91b4-f75a5945f82b
Bryant, Timothy
05bd12ef-e864-450e-96f5-addcc60c173d
Hacking, Nigel
fdc70f9c-e9d6-485c-a53d-e6988fa75cb0
Modi, Sachin
caef086a-dda5-418a-ada8-fc042e6e0b18
Maclean, Drew, Vigneswaran, Ganesh, Maher, Benjamin, Hadi, Mohammed, Harding, James, Harris, Mark, Bryant, Timothy, Hacking, Nigel and Modi, Sachin
(2023)
The effect of protective coil embolization of penile anastomoses during prostatic artery embolization on erectile function: a propensity-matched analysis.
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 34 (2), .
(doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2022.10.023).
Abstract
Purpose: To explore whether coil embolization of penile collateral arteries to prevent nontarget embolization during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) negatively affects erectile function. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained multicenter PAE database on all patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (January 2014 to July 2016). International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) scores were collected at baseline and within 12 months after the procedure. A logistic regression and nearest neighbor propensity-matched analysis (matched for age, baseline IIEF-5 scores, and use of 5α-reductase inhibitors) and paired t test were used to evaluate for differential impact on IIEF-5 scores between the group of patients who underwent (unilateral) penile collateral coil embolization and a matched control group of patients who did not. Results: Of a total of 216 patients, 26 underwent coil protection of an accessory pudendal vessel/penile collateral. After exclusions, 22 propensity-matched pairs were identified. The mean IIEF-5 score at baseline for the coil-embolized group was 14.8 ± 8.3 (out of a possible score of 30) and that for the matched control group was 14.0 ± 7.8. At the 12-month follow-up after the procedure, the mean follow-up IIEF-5 score was 15.5 ± 8.0 for the coil-embolized group and 14.2 ± 8.2 for the matched control group. The change in IIEF-5 scores after PAE was not significantly different between the 2 groups (0.66 ± 3.8 vs 0.20 ± 2.0; P = .64; 95% CI, -1.53 to 2.44). Conclusions: When penile collateral arteries were identified, protective coil embolization of penile collateral/accessory pudendal vessels during PAE was unlikely to affect erectile function negatively.
Text
The effect of protective coil embolization AAM
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
1-s2.0-S1051044322012787-main
- Version of Record
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 13 October 2022
e-pub ahead of print date: 22 October 2022
Published date: February 2023
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
D.M. has received a speaker honorarium from Guerbet. T.B. has proctored for Boston Scientific and Terumo, has received speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, and reports a study grant from Boston Scientific issued to the National Health Service. N.H. has received honoraria from Boston Scientific and Celonova as a speaker, has been on Advisory boards for BTG, and reports a study grant from Boston Scientific issued to the National Health Service. S.M. is a consultant for Guerbet and has received a speaker honorarium from Boston Scientific and Guerbet. The other authors have not identified a conflict of interest.No funding was received for this study, but the initial registry on which this study is based (UK-ROPE registry) was funded by a grant from Cook Medical and the British Society of Interventional Radiology.
Funding Information:
No funding was received for this study, but the initial registry on which this study is based (UK-ROPE registry) was funded by a grant from Cook and the British Society of Interventional Radiology .
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 SIR
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 474278
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/474278
ISSN: 1051-0443
PURE UUID: 53ec4fd3-853a-48e5-9e46-757f2e1a4532
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 17 Feb 2023 17:30
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 07:35
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Drew Maclean
Author:
Benjamin Maher
Author:
Mohammed Hadi
Author:
James Harding
Author:
Mark Harris
Author:
Timothy Bryant
Author:
Nigel Hacking
Author:
Sachin Modi
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
