Re: Surgical Management of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Attributed to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: AUA Guideline Amendment 2019.

K. McVary,J. Parsons

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000802

2020-02-18

Abstract:To the Editor: We read this amended Guideline with interest, and we applaud the American Urological Association for its continued diligence in the area of surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms. Regarding prostatic artery embolization (PAE), the Guideline panel recommends that the procedure only be performed in the setting of clinical trials. The panel admits that this recommendation is based on expert opinion, the lowest level of decision making. They also indicate that 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to date that evaluate and compare PAE to transurethral prostatectomy. As noted previously, other large and well respected bodies such as NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) in the United Kingdom and the FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) have reached different conclusions concerning PAE. We can understand how different bodies can come to different conclusions, even if we may disagree with the panel concerns, particularly in the area of complications such as radiation exposure and post-embolization syndrome, and vascular access. However, when considering the recommendations as a whole, we hope for further clarification on how the panel reviewed the available literature on PAE and decided on such a drastically different recommendation compared to other minimally invasive techniques reviewed, given that the evidence in some areas seems less robust than for PAE. For instance the panel deems that water vapor thermal therapy “may be offered to patients with lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) provided prostate volume is less than 80 gm,” although this recommendation is only supported by a single sham RCT, which had a number of limitations as indicated by those in the urology community at publication. Similarly aquablation, which was compared to transurethral prostatectomy in 181 patients in a single RCT, has received the more favorable “may be offered” recommendation. Despite the fact that this RCT only presents outcomes for the first year and no placebo controlled trials have been performed, the panel does not raise concerns regarding durability or verification of the lack of placebo effect in this area. The difference in recommendations raises the question of whether all minimally invasive techniques are required to reach the same evidentiary “bar” for a given endorsement. We are willing to accept the hesitation of the panel regarding PAE and we agree with the call for more multidisciplinary research. However, given the circumstances, it seems that several other minimally invasive techniques will need to be downgraded to the research setting as well.

Medicine