ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2021
Effect of superselective prostatic artery embolization on benign prostatic hyperplasia.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Semi-Automatic MRI Feature Assessment in Small- and Medium-Volume Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia after Prostatic Artery Embolization.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the safety and effectiveness of superselective prostatic artery embolization (PAE) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).
methodsSixty-five patients diagnosed with BPH in Fujian Provincial Hospital between December 2014 and July 2019 were included. Patients with ineffective drug treatment after 6 months, who refused surgery, or who were unsuitable for surgery were included. We observed postoperative complications, followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months, compared clinical symptoms, and monitored changes in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and prostatic volume (PV) before and after treatment.
resultsOf the 65 patients, 58 (89.23%) successfully received PAE; 44 and 14 bilateral and unilateral embolization, respectively. Clinical efficacy was 94.83% (55/58) after the 6-month follow-up. Postoperative PV, International Prostate Symptom Score, quality of life, maximum flow rate, and post-void residual significantly improved after 6 months (P < 0.05). One month after PAE, the serum total PSA increased by 1.47 (10.84/7.37) times and dropped 3 months later to a level lower than that before surgery (P < 0.05). Six months after PAE, the degree of relief from obstructive symptoms was more apparent than that of irritative symptoms. No serious complications were observed after PAE.
conclusionPAE was safe and effective for the treatment of BPH. The efficacy of bilateral PAE was better than that of unilateral PAE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.