ArticleCVIR endovascular2026
Current considerations in prostate artery embolisation.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 2026. 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.
- Prostatic Cryoablation to Treat Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Patients Not-Responding or Not-Amenable to Prostatic Artery Embolization.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProstate artery embolisation is an increasingly common, minimally invasive procedure performed for lower urinary tract symptoms caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia, with numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses concluding that PAE is safe and effective. Despite mounting evidence supporting its role in treating BPH, variability and debate exist across various practical and technical factors associated with PAE. MAIN BODY: PAE requires the use of a permanent embolic, typically microparticles or a liquid embolic, to induce ischaemia within the transitional zone of the prostate and shrink hyperplastic nodules. Microparticles have a large body of evidence that has established them as safe and effective. Liquid embolics can reduce procedure time and radiation dose but require operator experience with preparation and delivery. Pre-procedural CTA and cone beam CT are useful in defining anatomy and identifying non-target vasculature with the aim to reduce procedure time and risk of non-target embolisation but are associated with increased radiation dose. PAE can be safely performed from either a femoral or radial approach. Femoral access may be associated with higher rates of local complications and radial access is generally preferred by patients, although patient anatomy should be considered when selecting the site of access. There is recent evidence supporting the use of PAE as first-line therapy for BPH or as an adjunct prior to surgical intervention.
conclusionProstate artery embolisation is an important treatment option within the algorithm for managing BPH, and has matured into a credible, evidence-based option alongside surgery and medications. While the efficacy and safety of PAE are well established, varied technical considerations exist regarding embolic choice, access route, imaging adjuncts and the procedure's role within the treatment sequence. Current data supports a pragmatic, anatomy-driven approach that prioritises procedural precision, embolic control, and patient-centred decision-making over adherence to a single technique.
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.