THE ADVANTAGE OF THE TRANSRADIAL APPROACH FOR PROSTATE ARTERY EMBOLIZATION


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia is an important and challenging problem of modern medicine. One of the most modern methods of the treatment of this disease is prostatic artery embolization. This procedure is most often done through transfemoral approach. Transradial vascular access has many advantages over the transfemoral access. Our study presents a comparative analysis of the use of transradial and transfemoral approach in this type of interventions. Transradial access was used in 13 patients, and transfemoral access - in 12 patients. The success of the procedure was 100% in both groups. The total duration of the procedure, the time needed for catheterization of internal iliac and prostatic arteries and the radiation exposure were significantly lower in the transradial approach group. There were no significant differences in the incidence of complications between two groups. The use of the transradial access was associated with a significant reduction of the frequency and severity of the discomfort associated with the procedure. Transradial approach has numerous advantages over the transfemoral approach and may have great clinical significance.

About the authors

E. R Khayrutdinov

S.P. Botkin City Clinical Hospital; City Clinical Emergency Hospital №1

Email: eugkh@yandex.ru
канд. мед. наук, врач-рентгенолог отделения рентгенохирургических методов диагностики и лечения ГКБ им. С.П. Боткина ДЗ г. Москвы Moscow, 125284, Russian Federation; 664112, Omsk, Russian Federation

I. M Vorontsov

City Clinical Emergency Hospital №1

664112, Omsk, Russian Federation

S. B Zharikov

S.P. Botkin City Clinical Hospital

Moscow, 125284, Russian Federation

A. V Arablinskiy

S.P. Botkin City Clinical Hospital

Moscow, 125284, Russian Federation

Yu. T Ignatiev

Omsk State Medical Academy

Omsk, 644099, Russian Federation

O. V Leonov

Clinical Oncology Dispensary

Omsk, 644013, Russian Federation

References

  1. Lee C., Kozlowski J.M., Grayhack J.T. Intrinsic and extrinsic factors controlling benigh prostatic growth. Prostate. 1997; 31(2): 131-8.
  2. American Urological Association: Guideline: Management of Benigh Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH). Revised, 2010.
  3. Appleton D.S., Sibley G.N., Doyle P.T. Internal iliac artery embolisation for the control of severe bladder and prostate haemorrhage. Br. J. Urol. 1988; 61(1): 45-7.
  4. Michel F., Dubruille T., Cercueil J.P. et al. Arterial embolization for massive hematuria following transurethral prostatectomy. J. Urol. 2002; 168(6): 2550-1.
  5. Rastinehad A.R., Caplin D.M., Ost M.C. et al. Selective arterial prostatic embolization (SAPE) for refractory hematuria of prostatic origin. Urology. 2008; 71(2): 181-4.
  6. DeMeritt J.S., Elmasri F.F., Esposito M.P. et al. Relief of benign prostatic hyperplasia-related bladder outlet obstruction after transarterial polyvinyl alcohol prostate embolization. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2000; 11(6): 767-70.
  7. Carnevale F.C., Antunes A.A., da Motta Leal Filho J.M. et al. Prostatic artery embolization as a primary treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: preliminary results in two patients. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2010; 33(2): 355-61.
  8. Worthington-Kirsch R.L., Andrews R.T., Siskin G.P. et al. Uterine fibroid embolization: technical aspects. Tech. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2002; 5: 17-34.
  9. Carnevale F.C., da Motta-Leal-Filho J.M., Antunes A.A. et al. Quality of life and symptoms relief support prostatic artery embolization for patients with acute urinary retention due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 2012; 24: 535-42.
  10. Bilhim T., Pisco J., Rio Tinto H. et al. Unilateral versus bilateral prostatic arterial embolization for lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with prostate enlargement. Cardiovasc. Interv. Radiol. 2013; 36(2): 403-11.
  11. Mclvor J., Rhymer J.C. 245 transaxillary arteriograms in arteriopathic patients: success rate and complications. Clin. Radiol. 1992; 45(6): 390-4.
  12. Jolly S.S., Yusuf S., Cairns J. et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011; 377(9775): 1409-20.
  13. Tavris D.R., Gallauresi B.A., Lin B. et al. Risk of local adverse events following cardiac catheterisation by hemostasis device use and gender. J. Invasive Cardiol. 2004; 16(9): 459-64.
  14. Kanei Y., Kwan T., Nakra N.C. et al. Transradial cardiac catheterization: A review of access site complications. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011; 78(6): 840-6.
  15. Caputo R.P., Tremmel J.A., Rao S. et al. Transradial arterial access for coronary and peripheral procedures: Executive summary by the transradial committee of the SCAI. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2011; 78(6): 823-39.
  16. Sherev D.A., Shaw R.E., Brent B.N. Angiographic predictors of femoral access site complications: implication for planned percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2005; 65(2): 196-202.

Copyright (c) 2017 Eco-Vector


 


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies