Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22806245›Full record

SynthesisCardiovascular and interventional radiology2013

Portal vein embolization before liver resection: a systematic review.

K P van Lienden, J W van den Esschert, W de Graaf, S Bipat, J S Lameris, T M van Gulik, O M van Delden

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 203 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
203citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

203 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 460 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

143 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

K P van LiendenDepartment of Radiology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. k.p.vanlienden@amc.uva.nl
J W van den Esschert
W de Graaf
S Bipat
J S Lameris
T M van Gulik
O M van Delden
Academic Medical Center · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis is a review of literature on the indications, technique, and outcome of portal vein embolization (PVE).

methodsA systematic literature search on outcome of PVE from 1990 to 2011 was performed in Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases.

resultsForty-four articles were selected, including 1,791 patients with a mean age of 61 ± 4.1 years. Overall technical success rate was 99.3 %. The mean hypertrophy rate of the FRL after PVE was 37.9 ± 0.1 %. In 70 patients (3.9 %), surgery was not performed because of failure of PVE (clinical success rate 96.1 %). In 51 patients (2.8 %), the hypertrophy response was insufficient to perform liver resection. In the other 17 cases, 12 did not technically succeed (0.7 %) and 7 caused a complication leading to unresectability (0.4 %). In 6.1 %, resection was cancelled because of local tumor progression after PVE. Major complications were seen in 2.5 %, and the mortality rate was 0.1 %. A head-to-head comparison shows a negative effect of liver cirrhosis on hypertrophy response. The use of n-butyl cyanoacrylate seems to have a greater effect on hypertrophy, but the difference with other embolization materials did not reach statistical significance. No difference in regeneration is seen in patients with cholestasis or chemotherapy.

conclusionsPreoperative PVE has a high technical and clinical success rate. Liver cirrhosis has a negative effect on regeneration, but cholestasis and chemotherapy do not seem to have an influence on the hypertrophy response. The use of n-butyl cyanoacrylate may result in a greater hypertrophy response compared with other embolization materials used.

Indexed as

Portal VeinEmbolization, TherapeuticFemaleHepatectomyHumansLiver CirrhosisLiver NeoplasmsMalePostoperative ComplicationsPreoperative CarePrognosisRisk AssessmentSurvival RateTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID22806245
PMCPMC3549243
OpenAlexW2159241159

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.