Safety of Prostatic Artery Embolization via Transradial Access versus Transfemoral Access

• Published in: Journal of vascular and interventional radiology Vol. 35; no. 4; pp. 541 - 547
• Main Authors: Richardson, Andrew J., Kumar, Jessica, Richardson, Kenneth, Bhatia, Ansh, Pennix, Thomas, Shah, Khushi, Maini, Aneesha, Jalaeian, Hamed, Bhatia, Shivank
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.04.2024
• Subjects: Embolization, Therapeutic - adverse effects; Femoral Artery - diagnostic imaging; Humans; Male; Prostate - blood supply; Prostatic Hyperplasia - diagnostic imaging; Prostatic Hyperplasia - therapy; Radial Artery - diagnostic imaging; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; CT; DAP; TRA; DSA; PAE; IQR; IV; TIA; TFA; US
• ISSN: 1051-0443; 1535-7732
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2023.09.036

To compare prostatic artery embolization (PAE) via transradial access (TRA-PAE) versus transfemoral access (TFA-PAE) to assist access selection. Procedural outcomes and adverse events were evaluated in 998 patients who underwent PAE at a single center from April 2014 to August 2022; 821 (82%) underwent TRA-PAE (Group R) and 177 (18%) underwent TFA-PAE (Group F). Mean age and prostate size of Groups R and F were 69.2 years (SD ± 8.4) and 117.4 g (SD ± 63.1) and 75.2 years (SD ± 12.1) and 127.2 g (SD ± 83.6), respectively (P < .01 and P = .16; postpropensity matching: P = .38 and P = .35, respectively). Indications for PAE included lower urinary tract symptoms, acute or chronic urinary retention, and hematuria. Procedural and patient-specific metrics were reviewed. Technical success was defined as bilateral PAE. Adverse events were recorded according to the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) adverse events classification. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05. Technical success was achieved in 798 (97.2%) patients in Group R and 165 (93.2%) patients in Group F. Mean procedural time, single- and continuous-rotation fluoroscopy time, dose area product, and air kerma were significantly lower in Group R than in Group F (P < .001). Moreover, 6 (0.7%) patients in Group R and 9 (5.5%) patients in Group F had access site ecchymoses, whereas 5 (0.6%) patients in Group R and 6 (3.6%) in Group F had access site hematomas. Two patients experienced transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) after TRA-PAE and recovered without intervention. Two occult radial artery occlusions were noted, but no patient experienced hand ischemia. In a large single interventional radiologist cohort, TRA-PAE demonstrated similar technical success to that of TFA-PAE with lower access site hemorrhagic complications and radiation requirements; however, TIA and occult radial artery occlusions remain a concern. [Display omitted]