Predictors of technical outcome for prostatic artery embolisation using pre-procedural CT angiography

Objectives Predicting patients that will pose procedural technical challenges in prostate artery embolisation (PAE) remains difficult, with prolonged procedural times impacting on both patient dose and resource planning. Understanding the factors that influence these parameters as well as the likelihood of technical success is therefore important in effective patient selection and procedural planning. Methods Data were collected retrospectively for 75 consecutive patients who underwent PAE. Multiple patient predictor variables available from planning computed tomography angiography (CTA) were identified and measured objectively. The vessel angles navigated during the procedure, prostate volume, prostate artery (PA) diameter, PA origin, aortic atheroma, iliac tortuosity and baseline demographics were correlated with outcome variables (fluoroscopy time, air kerma (AK), dose area product (DAP), the number of cone beam CTs (CBCTs)) performed and whether bilateral embolisation was possible (technical success). Data were analysed using linear regression, ANOVA,ttests and chi-squared tests. Results Aortic atheroma severity significantly increased fluoroscopy time (p = 0.004), whilst air kerma (AK) was significantly greater in patients with smaller prostatic arteries (p = 0.009) and smaller pre-procedural prostate volumes (p = 0.038). Increased vascular tortuosity and prostatic artery origin were not shown to significantly affect fluoroscopy time or DAP. Smaller prostate artery size (p = 0.007) also increases the likelihood of either unilateral embolisation or technical failure. Conclusions Pre-operative prediction of technical outcome measures in PAE remains challenging. However, vascular calcification, prostatic artery diameter and prostate volume are likely to be important factors when considering the risk/benefits of PAE.

Automated summary

Predicting technical outcomes in prostate artery embolisation (PAE) remains challenging, with factors such as vascular calcification, prostatic artery diameter, and prostate volume likely playing important roles in determining the success of the procedure.