ArticleBioengineering & translational medicine2026
Quantitative determination of embolization endpoints based on local arterial pressure.
Article in Bioengineering & translational medicine, 2026. 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.
- Human-AI Interaction in Interventional Radiology: A Narrative Review of Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- Quantitative determination of embolization endpoints based on local arterial pressure.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to optimize the embolization endpoint to improve therapeutic outcomes in interventional procedures and minimize the risk of ectopic embolism caused by excessive embolic agent injection. Hemodynamic changes during embolization were simulated by modeling the terminal resistance vessels as a porous medium. An in vitro experimental platform has been developed to replicate the embolization process. Based on these simulations and experimental data, a quantitative method was established to evaluate the embolization endpoint using local arterial blood pressure. The method was further validated through renal artery embolization experiments in pigs. The quantitative method effectively predicted changes in local arterial pressure and flow rate, with an average error of approximately 1.65% in simulations and 3.09% in in vitro experiments. In animal studies, the pressure-based endpoint evaluation method closely aligned with imaging results, reducing the required embolic agent by an average of 17.86%. Local arterial blood pressure is considered a reliable criterion for determining the embolization endpoint, offering a relatively standardized and quantitative approach to embolization endpoint assessment. This method has significant clinical value in reducing radiation exposure and facilitating the automation of embolic agent injection procedures in the field of embolization therapy for solid tumors.
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.