ReviewPolish journal of radiology2025
Imaging modalities used in follow-up after coil embolization of splenic artery aneurysm - a systematic review.
Review in Polish journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Interventional Radiology in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Gynecological Conditions.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2026Review
- Endovascular and percutaneous embolization of hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm: Etiology, embolic agents and technical success, and experience from a single center.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Endovascular procedures have become the method of choice for treating splenic artery aneurysms (SSAs). However, there is no consensus regarding the intervals and imaging methods for follow-up examinations in patients with true SAAs treated with coil embolisation. We aimed to evaluate the utility of digital subtraction angiography (DSA), computed tomography angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA), contrast-enhanced ultrasound, and duplex ultrasound (DUS) for follow-up screening of patients with SAAs treated with coil embolisation. Material and methods: We conducted a systematic review according to the PRISMA 2020 Statement. We searched 5 databases: Embase, Medline Ultimate, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, each up to 10 April 2024. Eventually, 20 relevant original studies were included. Results: DSA is an invasive procedure that requires ionising radiation and should not be performed as a routine check-up. CTA is an appropriate examination method in patients immediately after coil embolisation in whom severe complications, primarily bleeding, are suspected. Still, it is unsuitable for assessing persistent aneurysmal sac perfusion. MRA is a promising noninvasive technique that does not require ionising radiation. Several studies have demonstrated the superiority of MRA over DSA in detecting small aneurysmal sac reperfusion. DUS, while not a standalone method, may supplement MRA in patients at low risk of reintervention. Conclusions: The evidence regarding follow-up imaging methods after SAAs coil embolisation is limited and of low quality. MRA should be preferred over DSA for detecting aneurysmal sac reperfusion. Due to artifacts, CTA is suitable for emergency cases but not for routine follow-up.
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.