Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38786229›Full record

ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Onyx

Paolo Perri, Giuseppe Sena, Paolo Piro, Tommaso De Bartolo, Stefania Galassi, Davide Costa, Raffaele Serra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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

7 authors.

Paolo PerriDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Annunziata Hospital, 1 Via Migliori, 87100 Cosenza, Italy.
Giuseppe SenaDepartment of Vascular Surgery, "Pugliese-Ciaccio" Hospital, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Paolo PiroDepartment of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Annunziata Hospital, 1 Via Migliori, 87100 Cosenza, Italy.
Tommaso De BartoloDepartement of Interventional Radiology, Annunziata Hospital, 1 Via Migliori, 87100 Cosenza, Italy.
Stefania GalassiDepartement of Interventional Radiology, Annunziata Hospital, 1 Via Migliori, 87100 Cosenza, Italy.
Davide CostaInteruniversity Center of Phlebolymphology (CIFL), Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9199-8755
Raffaele SerraDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4477-7412

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review focuses on the use of conventional gel or coil and "new" generation hydrogel used as an embolic agent in endovascular applications. In general, embolic agents have deep or multidistrict vascular penetration properties as they ensure complete occlusion of vessels by exploiting the patient's coagulation system, which recognises them as substances foreign to the body, thus triggering the coagulation cascade. This is why they are widely used in the treatment of endovascular corrections (EV repair), arteriovenous malformations (AVM), endoleaks (E), visceral aneurysms or pseudo-aneurysms, and embolisation of pre-surgical or post-surgical (iatrogenic) lesions. Conventional gels such as Onyx or coils are now commercially available, both of which are frequently used in endovascular interventional procedures, as they are minimally invasive and have numerous advantages over conventional open repair (OR) surgery. Recently, these agents have been modified and optimised to develop new embolic substances in the form of hydrogels based on alginate, chitosan, fibroin and other polymers to ensure embolisation through phase transition phenomena. The main aim of this work was to expand on the data already known in the literature concerning the application of these devices in the endovascular field, focusing on the advantages, disadvantages and safety profiles of conventional and innovative embolic agents and also through some clinical cases reported. The clinical case series concerns the correction and exclusion of endoleak type I or type II appeared after an endovascular procedure of exclusion of aneurysmal abdominal aortic (EVAR) with a coil (coil penumbra released by a LANTERN microcatheter), the exclusion of renal arterial malformation (MAV) with a coil (penumbra coil released by a LANTERN microcatheter) and the correction of endoleak through the application of Onyx 18 in the arteries where sealing by the endoprosthesis was not guaranteed.

Indexed as

coilembolic agentendovascular applicationhydrogel

Identifiers

PMID38786229
PMCPMC11120993

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.