Response to "Does Polyvinyl Alcohol Particle Size Change the Outcome of Prostatic Arterial Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia? Results from a Single-Center Randomized Prospective Study"

Abstract

I would like to thank Dr. Kisilevzky for his comments on the recently published studies on prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) ( 1 Bilhim T. Pisco J. Campos Pinheiro L. et al. Does polyvinyl alcohol particle size change the outcome of prostatic arterial embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia? Results from a single-center randomized prospective study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013; 24: 1595-1602 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (83) Google Scholar , 2 Bagla S. Rholl K.S. Sterling K.M. et al. Utility of cone-beam CT imaging in prostatic artery embolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013; 24: 1603-1607 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (76) Google Scholar ). I believe there are two main concerns raised. The first regards the prognostic value of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging–detected ischemia after PAE and the role of prostate volume (PV) measurements after PAE. The second questions the accuracy of PV measurements with transrectal ultrasound (US). Re: Does Polyvinyl Alcohol Particle Size Change the Outcome of Prostatic Arterial Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia? Results from a Single-Center Randomized Prospective StudyJournal of Vascular and Interventional RadiologyVol. 25Issue 4PreviewWe read with great interest the article by Bilhim et al (1) in which the authors compare two different particle sizes of embolic agents for prostatic artery embolization (PAE). In the same issue of the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Bagla et al (2) describe the use of state-of-the-art cone-beam computed tomography to identify the best location for delivery of the embolic agents while avoiding nontarget embolization. Full-Text PDF