Prostate Artery Embolization Versus Transurethral Resection of Prostate for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: a Meta Analysis
Zhang Junfei,Liu Chun,Gao Yangjie,Li Chao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-4416.2020.02.015
IF: 2.2662
2020-01-01
International Urology and Nephrology
Abstract:Objective To compare the efficacy and safety between prostate artery embolization (PAE) and transurethral resection of prostate(TURP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH),and to offer the theory basis for the selection of appropriate treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia.Methods Datebases such as PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane Library,CNKI,CBM,VIP and WanFang Data were used to search the randomized controlled trials(RCTs) and non-RCTs about PAE vs.TURP research about benign prostatic hyperplasia treatment.After the study selection,assessment and data extraction were conducted by two researches independently,and meta analysis was conducted using the RevMan 5.3 software to compare the efficacy and safety between PAE and TURP for the treatment of BPH.Results Nine studies including 675 patients which met with the selection criteria were involved in our study.The meta analysis results showed:The clinical efficacy of PAE was equal to TURP after 3 months follow-up,and the curative effect of PAE group was better than that of TURP group.The optimization of IPSS,QOL,Qmax,PVR and PV of the PAE group was also significantly better than the TURP group.After 12 months follow-up,though there was no statistical difference in the improvement of IPSS and PVR,some of indicators of the PAE group was significantly well than that of the TURP group such as QOL,Qmax and PV.Thus,the improvement of TURP group was better than that of PAE group.At last,we found there was no statistically significant difference in the improvement of IPSS,QOL,Qmax,PVR and PV between the PAE group and TURP group after 24 months follow-up,while the failure rate was higher in the PAE group (4.4％) than that of the TURP group (0.5％).Safety indicator:The results indicated that PAE group had less blood loss (MD =-98.25,95％ CI:-105.51-91.00,P ＜ 0.00001),shorter catheterization time (MD =-1.61,95％ CI:-2.31-0.90,P ＜ 0.0006),and shorter hospital stay (MD =-3.07,95％ CI =-4.40-1.74,P ＜0.00001) compared with TURP group,though there was no significant difference in operation time between the two groups (MD =17.28,95％ CI;-15.92-50.48,P =0.31).The complications in the PAE group (21.6％) were significantly lower than that in the TURP group (33.7 ％).Conclusions The short-term efficacy (3 months) of the PAE in the treatment of BPH is less effect than the TURP.The medium and long-term efficacy(24 months) of the PAE is equal to the TURP group,PAE is superior to TURP in intraoperative blood loss,time of indwelling catheter,time of hospital stay and the proportion complications.PAE can be used for patients with BPH,who cannot tolerate anesthesia and TURP.But the failure rate of PAE is higher than TURP.There is no enough evidence to conclude that PAE is superior than TURP for the treatment of BPH.More investigations with large-scale persons and rational designed research are needed to explore a optional therapeutic method for the BPH treatment.