A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Robotic-Assisted Versus Manual Prostatic Arterial Embolization for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Comparative Analysis. | LitMetric

Purpose: Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) is a safe and efficacious procedure for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), though is technically challenging. We present our experience of technical and clinical outcomes of robotic and manual PAE in patients with BPH.

Materials And Methods: IRB-approved retrospective study of 40 consecutive patients 49-81 years old with moderate or severe grade BPH from May 2014 to July 2015: 20 robotic-assisted PAE (group 1), 20 manual PAE (group 2). Robotic-assisted PAE was performed using the Magellan Robotic System. American Urological Association (AUA-SI) score, cost, technical and clinical success, radiation dose, fluoroscopy, and procedure time were reviewed. Statistical analysis was performed within and between each group using paired t test and one-way analysis of variance respectively, at 1 and 3 months.

Results: No significant baseline differences in age and AUA-SI between groups. Technical success was 100% (group 1) and 95% (group 2). One unsuccessful subject from group 2 returned for a successful embolization using robotic assistance. Fluoroscopy and procedural times were similar between groups, with a non-significant lower patient radiation dose in group 1 (30,632.8 mGy/cm vs 35,890.9, p = 0.269). Disposable cost was significantly different between groups with the robotic-assisted PAE incurring a higher cost (group 1 $4530.2; group 2 $1588.5, p < 0.0001). Clinical improvement was significant in both arms at 3 months: group 1 mean change in AUA-SI of 8.3 (p = 0.006), group 2: 9.6 (p < 0.0001). No minor or major complications occurred.

Conclusions: Robotic-assisted PAE offers technical success comparable to manual PAE, with similar clinical improvement with an increased cost.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-016-1514-zDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

robotic-assisted pae
12
group
9
benign prostatic
8
prostatic hyperplasia
8
technical clinical
8
manual pae
8
pae group
8
radiation dose
8
pae
6
robotic-assisted
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!