86 - Prostate Artery Embolization in the Office Based Lab Setting Versus Hospital Setting

Monday, March 31, 2025

12:10 PM – 1:10 PM CT

Location: Music City Center, Expo Poster Area

Poster Presenter(s)

Connie Liou, MD

Resident Physician
Columbia University, United States

Author/Co-author(s)

Abin Sajan, MD

Resident
Columbia Irving Medical Center, United States
SF

Samuel Fordyce, MD

Resident Physician
Columbia University, United States
Asad Baig, MD

Assistant Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University, United States
SR

Stephen P. Reis, MD

Associate Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University, United States
NA

Noor Ahmad, MD

Associate Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University, United States
David C. Sperling, MD

Associate Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University, United States
Kiyon Naser-Tavakolian, MD

Assistant Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University, United States

Purpose:

Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) is performed in a variety of settings including hospitals and office based laboratories (OBL). In this study we evaluated 175 PAE procedures performed in the hospital and OBL to identify differences in outcomes and procedure times.

Materials and Methods:

This was an IRB approved retrospective study of 175 PAE procedures performed between February 2020 and May 2024. International Prostate Symptom Score and prostate size was obtained before and after the procedure in follow up at 3 months. The data was divided into two groups (hospital and OBL). Additionally fluoroscopy time and radiation dose (mGy) were collected and compared between the two groups.

Results:

99 patients were in the hospital group and 76 were in the OBL group. Technical success rate was 94.9% in the hospital group (2 unilateral embolizations with remaining failures being due to atherosclerosis), and 88.2% in the OBL group (5 unilateral embolizations with remaining failures being due to atherosclerosis). No significant difference in baseline characteristics (age, IPSS, prostate size) were noted. There was no significant difference in PAE at the hospital vs OBL with regards to post procedure IPSS (7.7 for both groups, p = 0.99), prostate size (97.9g and 95.7g, respectively, p = 0.89), and fluoroscopy time (45.7 minutes and 48.8 minutes, respectively, p = 0.26). There was a significant decrease in radiation dose for procedures performed at the OBL compared to the hospital (2220.5mGy and 4420.3mGy, respectively, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion:

Prostate Artery Embolization can be safely performed in the OBL setting and has similar outcomes and lower radiation dose to the patient albeit with similar procedural fluoroscopy times.