# Coil-out: comparing outcomes after prostate artery embolization with and without endovascular coiling

## TL;DR

This study compares the effectiveness of prostate artery embolization with and without additional coiling, finding that embolization alone provides better symptom improvement.

## Contribution

The study provides new evidence that particle embolization alone is more effective than adjunctive coiling for prostate artery embolization.

## Key findings

- The Standard group showed greater IPSS reduction at both 1–5 and 9–15 months compared to the Coil-out group.
- QOL/Bother improvement was greater in the Standard group at 9–15 months.
- Procedure times were longer in the Standard group, while fluoroscopy times were longer in the Coil-out group.

## Abstract

This retrospective study evaluates post-procedural symptom score changes after prostate artery embolization (PAE) with (Coil-out) and without (Standard) adjunctive prostate artery coiling after particle embolization. Changes in IPSS, QOL/Bother, and SHIM-IIEF V are reported at 1–5- and 9–15-month intervals. 573 procedures were reviewed, and 317 patients were included with a mean age of 72.1 years. Results favored the Standard group with greater IPSS reduction at 1–5 (-12.2 vs. -9.9, p = 0.018) and 9–15 months (-12.5 vs. -7.6, p = 0.018), and greater QOL/Bother improvement in the Standard group at 9–15 months (-2.8 vs. -1.8, p = 0.014). Procedure times were longer in the Standard group (186 vs. 173 min; p = 0.039), whereas fluoroscopy times were longer in the Coil-out group (48.3 vs. 44.8 min; p = 0.014). Though limited by retrospective nature and lack of longer-term follow-up, these results support particle embolization alone over adjunctive coil embolization for PAE.