Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28573044›Full record

SynthesisMilitary Medical Research2017

The impacts of different embolization techniques on splenic artery embolization for blunt splenic injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jing-Jing Rong, Dan Liu, Ming Liang, Qing-Hua Wang, Jing-Yang Sun, Quan-Yu Zhang, Cheng-Fei Peng, Feng-Qi Xuan, Li-Jun Zhao, Xiao-Xiang Tian and 1 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Military Medical Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Splenic injury from blunt trauma.The British journal of surgery · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jing-Jing RongDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Dan LiuDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Ming LiangDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Qing-Hua WangDepartment of Cardiology, Xinqiao Hospital of Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, 400038 China.
Jing-Yang SunDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Quan-Yu ZhangDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Cheng-Fei PengDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Feng-Qi XuanDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Li-Jun ZhaoDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Xiao-Xiang TianDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
Ya-Ling HanDepartment of Cardiology, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang, 110016 China.
General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region · CNArmy Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSplenic artery embolization (SAE) has been an effective adjunct to the Non-operative management (NOM) for blunt splenic injury (BSI). However, the optimal embolization techniques are still inconclusive. To further understand the roles of different embolization locations and embolic materials in SAE, we conducted this system review and meta-analyses.

methodsClinical studies related to SAE for adult patients were researched in electronic databases, included PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar Search (between October 1991 and March 2013), and relevant information was extracted. To eliminate the heterogeneity, a sensitivity analysis was conducted on two reduced study sets. Then, the pooled outcomes were compared and the quality assessments were performed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The SAE success rate, incidences of life-threatening complications of different embolization techniques were compared by

resultsTwenty-three studies were included in 1st study set. And then, 13 of them were excluded, because lack of the necessary details of SAE. The remaining 10 studies comprised 2nd study set, and quality assessments were performed using NOS. In 1st set, the primary success rate is 90.1% and the incidence of life-threatening complications is 20.4%, though the cases which required surgical intervention are very few (6.4%). For different embolization locations, there was no obvious association between primary success rate and embolization location in both 1st and 2nd study sets (

conclusionsDifferent embolization techniques affect the clinical outcomes of SAE. The proximal embolization is the best option due to the less life-threatening complications. For commonly embolic material, coil is superior to gelfoam for fewer severe complications and less further surgery management.

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticHumansSpleenSplenic ArteryWounds, NonpenetratingBlunt splenic injuryClinical outcomeEmbolizationLocationMaterial

Identifiers

PMID28573044
PMCPMC5450228
OpenAlexW2619948882

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.