143 - Embolic Type Comparative Analysis in Prostate Artery Embolization: Efficacy and Safety Outcomes

Monday, April 13, 2026

3:36 PM - 3:45 PM ET

Presenting Author(s)

SF

Samuel Fordyce, MD

Resident Physician
Columbia University, United States

Author/Co-author(s)

AS

Abin Sajan, MD

Resident Physician
Columbia University Medical Center, United States
Connie Liou, MD

Resident Physician
Columbia University, United States
BM

Brett Musialowicz, MD

Resident Physician
Columbia University, United States
Raghuram Posham, MD

Assistant Professor
NewYork Presbyterian - Columbia University, United States
John Filtes, MD

IR/DR Resident
Columbia University Irving Medical Center, United States
HB

Hannah Bae, MD

Resident Physician
Staten Island University Hospital, United States
LY

Lindsay Young, MD

Assistant Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University Irving Medical Center, United States
Tarub S. Mabud, MD, MS

Resident Physician
New York University Grossman School of Medicine, United States
Debkumar Sarkar, DO

Associate Attending
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 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
Kiyon Naser-Tavakolian, MD

Assistant Professor Interventional Radiology
Columbia University, United States

Purpose: To compare efficacy and safety of 100-300 µm, 300-500 µm, and nBCA in prostate artery embolization (PAE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and hematuria, assessing clinical success, prostate volume reduction, bilateral embolization, adverse events (AEs), and IPSS reduction.

Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of 154 PAE procedures (2018–2025) included 100-300 µm (n=44), 300-500 µm (n=90), and nBCA (n=20). Clinical success was defined as IPSS ≤ 15 post-procedure, >50% IPSS reduction, foley removal, or hematuria cessation. Outcomes were clinical success rate, mean prostate volume reduction, bilateral embolization rate, AE rate, and mean IPSS reduction. Chi-square/Fisher’s exact tests compared categorical outcomes; ANOVA with pairwise t-tests assessed continuous outcomes (p< 0.05 significant).

Results: Clinical success rates were 81.82% (100-300 µm), 92.23% (300-500 µm), and 90.00% (nBCA) (p=0.16). Pairwise: 100-300 vs. 300-500 µm (p=0.07), 300-500 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.67), 100-300 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.43). Mean prostate volume reduction was 16.73% (100-300 µm, n=12), 28.27% (300-500 µm, n=37), and 25.45% (nBCA, n=8) (p=0.03). Pairwise: 100-300 vs. 300-500 µm (p=0.02), 300-500 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.61), 100-300 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.25). Bilateral embolization rates were 81.82% (100-300 µm), 67.96% (300-500 µm), and 94.74% (nBCA) (p=0.02). Pairwise: 100-300 vs. 300-500 µm (p=0.09), 300-500 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.01), 100-300 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.15). Minor AE rates were 18.18% (100-300 µm), 11.65% (300-500 µm, n=86), and 15.00% (nBCA) (p=0.60). Pairwise: 100-300 vs. 300-500 µm (p=0.31), 300-500 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.71), 100-300 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.73). Mean IPSS reduction was 14.33 (100-300 µm, n=18), 15.52 (300-500 µm, n=44), and 12.50 (nBCA, n=10) points (p=0.58). Pairwise: 100-300 vs. 300-500 µm (p=0.62), 300-500 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.34), 100-300 µm vs. nBCA (p=0.58). No major AEs occurred.

Conclusion: The 300-500 µm embolic type showed superior clinical success (92.23%), prostate volume reduction (28.27%), and IPSS reduction (15.5 points), with the lowest minor AE rate (11.65%). Significant differences in volume reduction (100-300 vs. 300-500 µm, p=0.02) and bilateral embolization (300-500 µm vs. nBCA, p=0.01) suggest 300-500 µm optimizes efficacy, though nBCA’s high bilateral embolization rate merits further study.