ArticleDiagnostic and interventional imaging
Middle meningeal artery embolization using cone-beam computed tomography augmented guidance in patients with cancer.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional imaging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Emergency embolization of acute hemorrhage: cone-beam computed tomography with advanced planning and guidance software-a systematic review and case series.CVIR endovascular · 2025Article
- International multi-center study of middle meningeal artery embolization for chronic subdural hematoma in cancer patients: Efficacy, safety, and outcomes in a high-risk population.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Feasibility and Safety of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Advanced Navigation to Optimize Intra-arterial Chemotherapy Infusion of Skull Base Tumors.Journal of neurological surgery. Part B, Skull base · 2025Article
- Embolization of Middle Meningeal Arteries for Symptomatic Subacute Subdural Hematoma in Patients with Cancer.Academic radiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) performed under cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) augmented guidance in patients with cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsEleven patients with cancer (seven women, four men; median age, 75 years; age range: 42-87 years) who underwent 17 MMAEs under CBCT with a combination of particles and coils for chronic subdural hematoma (SDH) (n = 6), postoperative SDH (n = 3), or preoperative embolization of meningeal tumor (n = 2) from 2022 to 2023 were included. Technical success, fluoroscopy time (FT), reference dose (RD), kerma area product (KAP) were analyzed. Adverse events and outcomes were recorded.
resultsThe technical success rate was 100% (17/17). Median MMAE procedure duration was 82 min (interquartile range [IQR]: 70, 95; range: 63-108 min). The median FT was 24 min (IQR: 15, 48; range: 21.5-37.5 min); the median RD was 364 mGy (IQR: 37, 684; range: 131.5-444.5 mGy); and the median KAP was 46.4 Gy.cm
conclusionMMAE under CBCT is a highly effective treatment option, but appropriate patient selection and careful consideration of potential risks and benefits is important for optimal patient outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.