Dr. Tiago Bilhim

Presenting author and winner of the Best Scientific Paper award, “Long-term outcome of prostatic artery embolization for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: single-centre retrospective study in 1072 patients over a 10-year period.” 

Why did you choose ET to submit your scientific abstract?

Bilhim: ET is a dedicated embolisation meeting organized in Europe by CIRSE. As our group is based in Europe and our work was on long-term outcomes of prostatic artery embolisation, it was logical to have this abstract in this meeting. Also, we were planning to have this work published in CVIR, the official journal of CIRSE, so it made perfect sense to present the data just before the online publication of our study. ET provides global promotion and visibility for researchers focusing on embolisation topics, so we wanted to promote our study findings with the help of ET.

Are there any special considerations to take into account when submitting this type of abstract?

Yes. They should cover topics of embolisation in IR – be that oncology, emergencies, bleeding or any other IR areas where embolisation plays a central role. Naturally, the study quality, cohort size, and follow-up data are essential to consider, as well as the innovative spirit of the work.

How did you find the submission process?

It was quite easy and efficient to handle. No problems.

You won the best scientific paper award – what do you think made your work stand out?

The topic is interesting for IR readership at the moment – it focused on prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). There is a gap in knowledge around PAE for BPH patients, namely, the long-term longevity of treatment effects, with no data on PAE after 5 years. Our study was the largest to-date (over 1000 patients) with data spanning up to 10 years. We provided new insights into PAE outcomes up to 5 and 10 years with a reasonable quality of follow-up data. We were also able to compare outcomes between 4 major embolic agents being used for PAE, something that has not been done until now.

Do you have any tips for physicians considering submitting an abstract?

Make sure that the novelty is there! Either a new embolic material or a new indication or new findings on established embolisation treatments. As much as possible, try to have a reasonable cohort size and adequate follow-up data. Make sure you identify the gap in clinical knowledge that justifies the current research, so that your conclusions may have implications for patient care. Use ET to promote your scientific research and as a platform to facilitate the final publication of your work in CVIR. Try to have the scientific work completely done by the time of abstract submission, so that it will be as rigorous as possible. Ideally, the abstract submitted to ET should be very similar to the abstract of the published paper in CVIR.

Will you submit an abstract for ET 2023 as well?

Our colleagues are trying to finish their data analyses in time for abstract submission. If we make it on time, we will have abstracts for ET!