Prostatic Embolization Research Articles

The 'Prostate Embolisation AS first-line therapY compAred to meDication in treatment naïVe men with prostAte eNlargement, a randomised ControllEd trial' (P-EASY ADVANCE): a randomised controlled trial of prostate embolisation vs medication for BPH.

To compare prostate artery embolisation (PAE) to the combination of tamsulosin and dutasteride therapy as a potential first-line therapy for obstructive benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in treatment-naïve patients in the 'Prostate Embolisation AS first-line therapY compAred to meDication in treatment naïVe men with prostAte eNlargement, a randomised ControllEd trial' (P-EASY ADVANCE). A total of 39 men with enlarged prostates, moderate-severe lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and obstructed/equivocal urodynamic studies (UDS), and who had no prior treatment for BPH, were randomised to receive either combined medical therapy with tamsulosin and dutasteride (medication) or PAE. Follow-up UDS, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), uroflowmetry and ultrasound were performed at short- to medium-term intervals following interventions and compared to baseline. The medication and PAE treatment groups had similar baseline characteristics, including prostate volumes (87.8 and 85.4 mL respectively), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax; 6.5 and 6.6 mL/s, respectively), IPSS (19.5 and 21, respectively) and obstructed UDS (79% and 74%, respectively). Both interventions improved voiding and bladder outflow obstruction from baseline, with more patients unobstructed after PAE (63%) compared to medication (28%) (P = 0.03). PAE patients had significantly greater reductions in prostate size (P < 0.001), incomplete emptying (P = 0.002), total IPSS (P = 0.032), Qmax (P = 0.006) and quality of life (P = 0.001). Altered ejaculation, erectile dysfunction and nausea were more common in the medication group. Prostate artery embolisation was more effective than combined medical therapy at reducing urinary obstruction, decreasing prostate volume and improving LUTS in patients with BPH who had not previously been treated. This is the first randomised control study to compare PAE and combined medical therapy in exclusively treatment-naïve patients and raises the potential of PAE as an alternative early treatment option for BPH. Further randomised comparative trials are planned to further validate the role of PAE in mitigating obstructive BPH.

Comparing prostatic artery embolization to surgical and minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundTo summarize current evidence to report a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and open simple prostatectomy (OSP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).MethodsA systematic literature search was performed to identify studies published from inception until August 2021. The search terms used were (prostate embolization OR prostatic embolization) AND (prostatic hyperplasia OR prostatic obstruction) as well as the abbreviations of PAE and BPH. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies—of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for observational studies. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.4.ResultsSeven studies were included with 810 patients: five RCTs and one observational study compared PAE with TURP, and one observational study compared PAE with OSP. The included studies had considerable risk of bias concerns. TURP and OSP were associated with more statistically significant improvements in urodynamic measures and BPH symptoms compared to PAE. However, PAE seems to significantly improve erectile dysfunction compared to OSP and improve other outcome measures compared to TURP, although not significantly. PAE appeared to reduce adverse events and report more minor complications compared with TURP and OSP, but it is unclear whether PAE is more effective in the long-term.ConclusionPAE is an emerging treatment option for patients with symptomatic BPH who cannot undergo surgery or have undergone failed medical therapy. Overall, PAE groups reported fewer adverse events. Future ongoing and longer-term studies are needed to provide better insight into the benefit of PAE compared to other treatment options.

Non-target embolic events during prostatic embolization with ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH)

BackgroundThis study evaluated nontarget embolization (NTE) during prostatic artery embolization (PAE) with ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (EVOH).ResultsTen consecutive patients treated by PAE with EVOH for the presence of disabling benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) between June 22 and January 2023 were included in this prospective study. The inclusion criteria were as follows: LUTS attributed to BPH, LUTS duration ≥ 6 months, failure to respond to standard pharmacotherapy, IPSS > 18 or QoL score > 2, and prostate volume > 40 mL. Embolization was performed under general anaesthesia. According to established techniques, a microcatheter was positioned bilaterally within the feeding arteries, and EVOH was injected slowly under X-ray control. Unenhanced pelvic computed tomography scans were carried out before and after embolization to assess the NTE. The safety of the prostatic embolization procedure with EVOH was assessed by collecting adverse effects over 3 months of evaluation that included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) score.-up evaluations, occurring at 3, 6, and 12months, included International Prostate Symptom Score.Bilateral PAE was technically successful in 9 patients, and unilateral injection was performed in one patient. The postoperative scanner showed a distribution of the embolization material in the two lobes of the prostate in all patients. The procedure time varied from 120 to 150 (mean: 132) minutes. Eight out of 10 patients developed pollakiuria within 24 h; none of the patients had postoperative pain. Two patients required catheterization for postoperative urinary retention. Catheters were removed successfully at the end of the first day for one of these patients and on the tenth day for the other. At the 3-month follow-up, patients showed significant improvement in the International Prostate Symptom Score (n = 10; mean = -11,5; P < 0.01) and quality of life score (n = 10; mean = -3,40; P < 0.01). Only one patient presented one asymptomatic muscular NTE.ConclusionsPAE with EVOH is safe, effective, and associated with few NTEs and no postoperative pain. Prospective comparative studies with longer follow-ups are warranted.Trial registrationIDRCB, 2021-AO29-56–35. Registered 27 May 2022, http://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05395299?cond=embolization&term&rank=1.

Complications associated with minimally invasive surgical therapies (MIST) for surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database review.

MAUDE database houses medical device reports of suspected device-related complications received by Food and Drug Administration. In the present study we aim to evaluate the MAUDE database for reported complications of MIST procedures. The database was queried using keywords: rezum, urolift, prostate embolization (PAE), transurethral needle ablation (TUNA), transurethral microwave therapy (TUMT), prostate stent and Temporarily Implanted Nitinol Device (iTIND) on 10/1/22 to extract information regarding device problems and procedure-related complications. Gupta classification system was used to stratify complications. Statistical analysis was performed to compare frequency of complications among MIST procedures. We found a total of 692 reports (Rezum-358, urolift-226, PAE-53, TUNA-31, TUMT-19, prostatic stent-4, and iTIND-1). Most complications related to device or users were minor (level 1 and 2) and there was no significant difference among various MIST procedures. The screen/system error was responsible for 93% and 83% aborted cases in Rezum and TUNA, respectively, and PAE showed 40% of device component detachment/fracture. Overall Urolift and TUMT were associated with statistically significant higher incidence of major (level 3 and 4) complications (23% and 21%, respectively) as compared with Rezum (7%). Most major complications needing hospitalization after Urolift included hematoma and hematuria with clots and those after Rezum included urinary tract infection and sepsis. Thirteen deaths were reported, mostly due to cardiovascular events, which were classified as not associated with the proposed treatment. MIST for BPH can occasionally cause significant morbidity. Our data should assist urologists and patients in shared decision-making process.

Abstract No. 143 Impact of Cone-beam CT on Radiation Dose during Prostatic Embolization

Abstract No. 143 Impact of Cone-beam CT on Radiation Dose during Prostatic Embolization

Abstract No. 147 Early Outcomes and Safety of Prostate Embolization with n-Butyl Cyanoacrylate Liquid Embolic: A Single-Center Safety and Feasibility Study

Abstract No. 147 Early Outcomes and Safety of Prostate Embolization with n-Butyl Cyanoacrylate Liquid Embolic: A Single-Center Safety and Feasibility Study

Efficacy and Safety of Prostatic Artery Embolization in the Treatment of High Risk Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia and its Influence on Postoperative Life Quality of Patients.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy, safety and postoperative quality of life of high risk benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients treated with prostatic artery embolization.Methods34 patients with high-risk BPH were selectedfrom January 2020 to June 2021 in our hospital. All patients were treated with prostatic artery embolization. The changes of international prostate symptom score (IPSS), prostate volume (PV), remaining urine (RU), maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), quality of life scale -74(GQOLI-74), time to sleep without disturbance (HUS) judgment, self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) score and self-rating depression scale (SDS) were compared before operation, 1 month and 6 months after operation.ResultsProstatic artery embolization was successful in all 34 patients, including unilateral embolization in 15 patients and bilateral embolization in 19 patients. No severe complications occurred in the postoperative patients. The IPSS, PV and RU levels of the patient one month and six months after surgery were lower than those before surgery, while the Qmax level was higher than that before surgery. Besides, the IPSS, PV and RU levels six months after surgery were significantly lower than those one month after surgery, and the Qmax level was significantly higher than that one month after surgery (p < 0.05). The GQOLI-74 score six months after surgery was significantly higher than that before surgery (p < 0.05). The HUS of the patient six months after surgery was significantly increased, and the SAS and SDS scores were significantly decreased as compared with those before surgery (p < 0.05).ConclusionFor high-risk patients with BPH, prostate embolization is an effective and safe method, which can significantly improve the quality of life of patients after surgery and has good application prospects.

Public Interest in Prostatic Artery Embolization: An Analysis of Search Query Data

Background: Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is an emerging treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). However, changes in public interest in PAE over time, especially relative to interest in alternative BPH treatments, are difficult to assess. The online tool for analysis of the popularity of top search queries (Google Trends; Alphabet Inc) provides a relative search volume (RSV) of specified keywords and insight about patterns of user searches.Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess changes in public interest in PAE over time and compare them with changes in public interest in alternative BPH treatments as indicated by search queries.Material and Methods: Using Google Trends, we identified the RSV of specified keywords within search queries submitted between 2010 and 2019 in the United States. The RSVs of keywords with high search volume were identified and normalized on a scale of values from 0 to 100. Interest in PAE was assessed by comparing RSVs and trends of the keyword PAE as well as of other prostate-treatment-related keywords. Prostate embolization was a PAE-related, BPH-treatment-specific keyword with the highest average RSV. A linear regression analysis was performed to characterize annual search trends of the use of these keywords. Subsequently, the annual search trend of prostate embolization was compared with that of keywords related to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and minimally invasive surgical treatments (MISTs).Results: The mean annual RSV of prostate embolization increased by 8.6 fold between 2010 and 2019. However, during this period, the mean RSV of the keywords transurethral resection of the prostate and TURP were 3.6 and 49.3 times higher, respectively (P&lt;0.0001), than the mean annual RSV of prostate embolization. Moreover, the MIST-related keywords rezum and urolift showed respective mean RSVs 3.1 and 9.0 times higher (P&lt;0.0001) than the mean annual RSV of prostate embolization.Conclusions: Search query data can elucidate public interest in interventional radiologic (IR) procedures. An increase in RSVs of PAE keywords over time suggests increasing public knowledge of and about the procedure. However, the RSVs of PAE keywords is far lower than the RSVs of keywords related to urologic surgeries, suggesting the need for continued efforts to educate patients and providers about the nature and the values of IR procedures.

Re: Early Results of Unilateral Prostatic Artery Embolization as a Focal Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer Under Active Surveillance: Cancer Prostate Embolisation, a Pilot Study

Re: Early Results of Unilateral Prostatic Artery Embolization as a Focal Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer Under Active Surveillance: Cancer Prostate Embolisation, a Pilot Study

1-year cost-utility analysis of prostate artery embolization (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)

ObjectiveTo determine whether prostate artery embolization (PAE) is a cost-effective alternative to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the management of benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) after 1-year follow-up.Design, setting...

Prostatic artery embolization treatment for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia who are permanent urinary catheter users ineligible for de-obstructive surgery

IntroductionBenign prostatic hyperplasia is considered the most frequent cause of lower urinary tract symptoms. Urinary catheterization is the emergency treatment for patients with urinary retention and surgery is indicated in patients refractory to medical treatment. There is a group of people with important comorbidities that make them ineligible for surgery. Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) could be presented as a safe and effective alternative to achieve bladder emptying and spontaneous urination, thus avoiding permanent urinary catheterization in patients with significant comorbidities that represent a contraindication for surgery. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the efficacy of PAE in patients with permanent urinary catheterization who are ineligible for surgical treatment. Material and methodsRetrospective study of 26 patients with permanent urinary catheter who underwent prostatic embolization. Demographic and clinical data (age, use of anticoagulation, prostate volume, length of hospital stay, unilateral or bilateral embolization), Charlson comorbidity index evaluation and Clavien-Dindo classification for procedural complications were reviewed. Successful removal of permanent urinary catheter was analyzed at one month after the procedure. ResultsA total of 26 patients were included in the review. The median age was 85 years with a median prostate volume of 90 mL. A Charlson comorbidity score above 7 was obtained in 88.5% of the subjects. Only one patient had one Clavien-Dindo III complication. Of the 26 subjects, 17 (65.4%) had spontaneous micturition and a postvoid residual lower than 100 mL at one month post procedure. Overall, catheter removal was achieved in 19 out of 26 subjects (73.1%). ConclusionPAE is a safe and effective treatment for patients with permanent urinary catheterization who are ineligible for surgical treatment.

Embolización prostática como tratamiento para pacientes con hiperplasia benigna de próstata portadores de sonda vesical permanente no tributarios a cirugía desobstructiva

IntroductionBenign prostatic hyperplasia is considered the most frequent cause of lower urinary tract symptoms. Urinary catheterization is the emergency treatment for patients with urinary retention and surgery is indicated in patients refractory to medical treatment. There is a group of people with important comorbidities that make them ineligible for surgery. Prostatic arterial embolization (PAE) could be presented as a safe and effective alternative to achieve bladder emptying and spontaneous urination, thus avoiding permanent urinary catheterization in patients with significant comorbidities that represent a contraindication for surgery. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the efficacy of PAE in patients with permanent urinary catheterization who are ineligible for surgical treatment. Material and methodsRetrospective study of 26 patients with permanent urinary catheter who underwent prostatic embolization. Demographic and clinical data (age, use of anticoagulation, prostate volume, length of hospital stay, unilateral or bilateral embolization), Charlson comorbidity index evaluation and Clavien-Dindo classification for procedural complications were reviewed. Successful removal of permanent urinary catheter was analyzed at one month after the procedure. ResultsA total of 26 patients were included in the review. The median age was 85 years with a median prostate volume of 90mL. A Charlson comorbidity score above 7 was obtained in 88.5% of the subjects. Only one patient had one Clavien-Dindo III complication. Of the 26 subjects, 17 (65.4%) had spontaneous micturition and a postvoid residual lower than 100mL at one month post procedure. Overall, catheter removal was achieved in 19 out of 26 subjects (73.1%). ConclusionPAE is a safe and effective treatment for patients with permanent urinary catheterization who are ineligible for surgical treatment.

Prostatic Artery Embolization (PAE) and Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) have a Differential Impact on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS): Retrospective Analysis of the Multicentre UK-ROPE (UK Register of Prostate Embolization) Study

PurposeTo compare the relative IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score) improvement in storage and voiding symptoms between prostatic artery embolization (PAE) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP).MethodRetrospective analysis of the UK-ROPE (UK Register of Prostate Embolization) multicentre database was conducted with inclusion of all patients with full IPSS questionnaire score data. The voiding and storage subscore improvement was compared between interventions. Student’s t-test (paired and unpaired) and ANOVA (Analysis of variance) were used to identify significant differences between the groups.Results146 patients (121 PAE, 25 TURP) were included in the analysis. Storage symptoms were more frequently the most severe symptom (‘storage’ in 75 patients vs ‘voiding’ in 17 patients). Between groups, no significant difference was seen in raw storage subscore improvement (TURP 4.9 vs PAE 4.2; p = 0.34) or voiding subscore improvement (TURP 8.4 vs PAE 6.7; p = 0.1). ANOVA demonstrated a greater proportionate reduction (relative to total IPSS) towards voiding symptoms in the TURP group (27.3% TURP vs 9.9% PAE, p = 0.001).ConclusionAlthough both TURP and PAE improve voiding symptoms more than storage, a significantly larger proportion of total symptom reduction is due to voiding in the TURP cohort, with PAE providing a more balanced improvement between voiding and storage.

Society of Interventional Radiology Quality Improvement Standards for Percutaneous Transcatheter Embolization

Percutaneous embolization procedures are commonly performed by interventional radiologists. This quality improvement (QI) standard was first published in 2010 (1), and this document represents the second update. Since the 2010 standards, many additional randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies have been published on transcatheter embolization for various disease entities, further establishing embolization as an effective treatment. Additionally, the indications of embolization have expanded with newer procedures, like prostatic embolization for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and emerging procedures, such as left gastric artery embolization for the treatment of obesity and genicular artery embolization for the treatment of pain related to osteoarthritis (OA).

Early Results of Unilateral Prostatic Artery Embolization as a Focal Therapy in Patients with Prostate Cancer under Active Surveillance: Cancer Prostate Embolisation, a Pilot Study

PurposeTo evaluate the feasibility of prostatic artery embolization in patients with low-risk prostate cancer (PC) under active surveillance (AS). MethodsThis monocentric prospective pilot study, running from June 2018 to June 2019, included 10 patients with low-risk PC under AS, median age 72 years (range, 62–77 years), with a unilateral focal lesion visible on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, with Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System v2 score ≥3/5 confirmed by multiparametric MR imaging-targeted biopsy and Gleason score 6. The patients underwent unilateral prostatic artery embolization with 300–500 μm Embospheres in the affected prostatic lobe. The primary endpoint was technical feasibility (prostate and no off-target ischemia in the imaging). The secondary endpoints included safety, negative biopsies/MR imaging response/functional outcomes at 6 months, and oncologic efficacy at 1 year. ResultsEmbolization was successfully achieved in all patients; prostate ischemia was confirmed on multiparametric MR imaging, and no off-target ischemia was reported. No major complications were reported. Four patients (40%) presented with both negative targeted and systematic biopsies at 6 months. No lesions were seen on the MR imaging in 30% of patients. The mean International Prostate Symptom Score and International Index of Erectile Function score were 7 and 19 and 5 and 20 at baseline and 6 months, respectively, with no significant difference. Nine patients (90%) were still under AS at 1 year. One patient (10%) had PC progression outside the target lesion and was switched over to curative radiotherapy. ConclusionsProstatic artery embolization is feasible and appears safe for prostate cancer patients under AS, with no impact on erectile function or continence status. These results justify the pursuit of further studies.

A (new) revolution in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia? Aqua-ablation and prostate embolization

Surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) is one of the most common procedures in urology. Numerous alternative methods have been developed in recent years to overcome the potential limitations of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) while providing comparable effectiveness and less morbidity. In arandomized study with acurrently available follow-up of 3years, the Aquabeam® system has shown comparable functional results with alower rate of adverse events compared to TURP. Sufficient functional results were also found in acohort study in patients with prostate volumes up to 150 ml. However, the rate of transfusions raises the question of optimal coagulation. Further cohort studies with short-term follow-up confirmed the results of the randomized studies. Prostate artery embolization (PAE) has been compared to TURP in several randomized trials. In randomized studies, the reduction of BPO-associated symptoms after PAE is only slightly inferior to that after TURP. In contrast, the improvement of functional parameters after embolization is inferior to that after TURP. This is primarily due to the inferior desobstruction. In addition, long-term results from randomized studies are lacking, so that no final assessment has yet been possible with regard to the durability of the desobstruction. In summary, both Aquabeam® and PAE are potential alternatives to standard methods, which-in case of adequate patient selection-can supplement the operative armamentarium in the wider concept of an individualized therapy of BPO.

The superselective prostatic arterial embolization for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with hypertension and its influence on sexual function

Objective To investigate the effect of superselective prostatic arterial embolization on patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and hypertension. Methods From January 2015 to January 2018, 80 cases of prostatic hyperplasia with hypertension were selected in our hospital. The patients were divided into experimental group and control group according to the random number table method. Forty patients in each group were treated with transurethral resection of prostate, and the patients in the experimental group were treated with super selective prostate action. Pulse embolization was performed to compare the volume of prostate (PV), urinary bladder residual urine volume (PSV), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), international erectile function index (IIFE-5) and international prostate symptom score (IPSS) in two groups of patients before and after 3 months of operation, and the postoperative adverse reactions such as urinary infection and stool in the two groups of patients were compared. The incidence of dysfunction and abdominal distention were statistically compared. Results The difference of PV, PSV and Qmax in the two groups before the operation was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The PV and PSV in the experimental group were lower than the control group, and Qmax was higher than the control group (P 0.05), and the experimental group after the operation. The IIFE-5 score of the patients was higher than that of the control group, and the IPSS score was lower than that of the control group (P<0.05). The incidence of ADR in the experimental group was lower than that of the control group (P<0.05). Conclusions The curative effect of super selective prostatic embolization in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with hypertension is worthy of affirmation, and the postoperative sexual function of the patients is obviously improved, and the incidence of postoperative complications is low. Key words: Prostatic Hyperplasia; Hypertension; Embolization, Therapeutic; Sexual Dysfunction, Physiological

Prostate Embolization in Chronically Surveyed Patients: Effectiveness of Unilateral vs. Bilateral Embolization

Prostate Embolization in Chronically Surveyed Patients: Effectiveness of Unilateral vs. Bilateral Embolization

Prostate Artery Embolization in Patients With Acute Urinary Retention

BackgroundThis prospective study assessed the efficacy of prostate artery embolization after failure of a trial without catheter in patients suffering a first episode of acute urinary retention as a result of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MethodsPatients with failure of a trial without catheter despite alpha-blocker therapy were invited to participate in this protocol. Twenty patients were included in the study, and all underwent prostate artery embolization with calibrated polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) microspheres (Bead Block, BTG Ltd., Farnham, UK). ResultsSuccessful removal of the indwelling bladder catheter and spontaneous voiding was achieved in 15 of 20 (75%) patients, and the overall clinical success at 6 months after prostate embolization was 14 of 20 (70%). No patient experienced severe adverse events. ConclusionsProstate artery embolization might be a valuable treatment after a failure of a trial without catheter. Further studies are needed to better define its place in this setting.

04:21 PM Abstract No. 12 Transarterial embolization of prostate with biodegradable flutamide-loaded PLA/PLGA microspheres for benign prostate hyperplasia: preliminary study in a normal swine model

To prospectively evaluate whether transarterial embolization with biodegradable flutamide-loaded PLA/PLGA microspheres with sustained-release properties in the prostate of swine can induce shrinkage in the volume of prostatic tissue. Flutamide is a strong nonsteroidal antiandrogen acts as selective, competitive and silent antagonist. Sustained-release flutamide-loaded polylactide/poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLA/PLGA) microspheres were successfully fabricated using the single emulsion (o/w) solvent evaporation method in our preliminary study. Twelve male swines were randomly assigned to either the experimental group (n-6) or control group (n-6). Selective angiography was performed to deliver microspheres. In the experimental group, 200–700 micron in diameter flutamide-loaded microspheres were used for embolization.250 mg of total flutamide was used per procedure. 6 weeks later animals euthanized for necropsy, the prostates were removed for size measurement and histopathologic examination. Paired Student t test was used for statistical analysis. All procedures were technically succesful. The mean prostate volume after embolization in the experimental group was significantly (P<0.001) diminished compared with the mean prostate volume for the control group. Microscopic examination showed that normal gland structure was partially replaced by fibrosis and atrophy in the residual gland tissue. Embolization of the prostatic arteries with flutamide-loaded PLA/PLGA microspheres can induce strong shrinkage of the prostate. This study shows that transarterial targeted embolization of prostatic arteries with flutamide-loaded PLA/PLGA microspheres with sustained release properties may provide an effective alternative approach to the treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia in humans.