Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33501598›Full record

SynthesisEuropean radiology2021

Portal vein embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate glue is superior to other materials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Adnan Ali, Margareta Ahle, Bergthor Björnsson, Per Sandström

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. The Use of Glue as an Embolic Agent in Trauma.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Initial experience with Double-vein Embolization in Hungary.European journal of radiology open · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Adnan AliLancaster Medical School, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK. adnan.ali.lancs@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4255-0230
Margareta AhleDepartment of Radiology and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Bergthor BjörnssonDepartment of Surgery and Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University Hospital of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden.
Per SandströmDepartment of Surgery and Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University Hospital of Linköping, Linköping, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIt remains uncertain which embolization material is best for portal vein embolization (PVE). We investigated the various materials for effectiveness in inducing future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy, technical and growth success rates, and complication and resection rates.

methodsA systematic review from 1998 to 2019 on embolization materials for PVE was performed on Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane. FLR growth between the two most commonly used materials was compared in a random effects meta-analysis. In a separate analysis using local data (n = 52), n-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) was compared with microparticles regarding costs, radiation dose, and procedure time.

resultsIn total, 2896 patients, 61.0 ± 4.0 years of age and 65% male, from 51 papers were included in the analysis. In 61% of the patients, either NBCA or microparticles were used for embolization. The remaining were treated with ethanol, gelfoam, or sclerosing agents. The FLR growth with NBCA was 49.1% ± 29.7 compared to 42.2% ± 40 with microparticles (p = 0.037). The growth success rate with NBCA vs microparticles was 95.3% vs 90.7% respectively (p < 0.001). There were no differences in major complications between NBCA and microparticles. In the local analysis, NBCA (n = 41) entailed shorter procedure time and reduced fluoroscopy time (p < 0.001), lower radiation exposure (p < 0.01), and lower material costs (p < 0.0001) than microparticles (n = 11).

conclusionPVE with NBCA seems to be the best choice when combining growth of the FLR, procedure time, radiation exposure, and costs. KEY POINTS: • The meta-analysis shows that n-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) is superior to microparticles regarding hypertrophy of the future liver remnant, 49.1% ± 29.7 vs 42.2% ± 40.0 (p = 0.037). • There is no significant difference in major complication rates for portal vein embolization using NBCA, 4% (24/681), compared with microparticles, 5% (25/494) (p > 0.05). • Local data shows a shorter procedure time, 215 vs 348 mins from arrival to departure at the interventional radiology unit, and fluoroscopy time, 43 vs 96 mins (p < 0.001), lower radiation dosage, 573 vs 1287 Gycm

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticEnbucrilateLiver NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHepatectomyHumansMalePortal VeinTreatment OutcomeEnbucrilateEmbolization, therapeuticEnbucrilateHypertrophyPortal veinRadiation dosage

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.