Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34142192›Full record

SynthesisCardiovascular and interventional radiology2021

Predictive Factors for Hypertrophy of the Future Liver Remnant After Portal Vein Embolization: A Systematic Review.

E A Soykan, B M Aarts, M Lopez-Yurda, K F D Kuhlmann, J I Erdmann, N Kok, K P van Lienden, E A Wilthagen, R G H Beets-Tan, O M van Delden and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Initial experience with Double-vein Embolization in Hungary.European journal of radiology open · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

E A SoykanDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. e.a.soykan@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6266-8386
B M AartsDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M Lopez-YurdaDepartment of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
K F D KuhlmannDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J I ErdmannDepartment of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
N KokDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
K P van LiendenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
E A WilthagenScientific Information Service, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
R G H Beets-TanDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
O M van DeldenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
F M GomezDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
E G KlompenhouwerDepartment of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
The Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLAmsterdam Neuroscience · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review was conducted to determine factors that are associated with the degree of hypertrophy of the future liver remnant following portal vein embolization. An extensive search on September 15, 2020, and subsequent literature screening resulted in the inclusion of forty-eight articles with 3368 patients in qualitative analysis, of which 18 studies were included in quantitative synthesis. Meta-analyses based on a limited number of studies showed an increase in hypertrophy response when additional embolization of segment 4 was performed (pooled difference of medians = - 3.47, 95% CI - 5.51 to - 1.43) and the use of N-butyl cyanoacrylate for portal vein embolization induced more hypertrophy than polyvinyl alcohol (pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.60, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.91). There was no indication of a difference in degree of hypertrophy between patients who received neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and those who did not receive pre-procedural systemic therapy(pooled SMD = - 0.37, 95% CI - 1.35 to 0.61), or between male and female patients (pooled SMD = 0.19, 95% CI - 0.12 to 0.50).The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on April 28, 2020 (CRD42020175708).

Indexed as

HypertrophyEmbolization, TherapeuticHepatectomyHumansLiverLiver NeoplasmsPortal VeinRetrospective StudiesFuture liver remnant (FLR)HypertrophyPortal vein embolization (PVE)

Identifiers

PMID34142192
PMCPMC8382618
OpenAlexW3165937491

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.