Coil-out: comparing outcomes after prostate artery embolization with and without endovascular coiling.

Griffin P J McNamara, Matthew Carter, Lucas R Cusumano, Justin P McWilliams

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in CVIR endovascular, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Griffin P J McNamaraDepartment of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology, Ronald Reagan University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Medical Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 757 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.

Matthew CarterDavid Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 885 Tiverton Drive, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.

Lucas R CusumanoDepartment of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology, Ronald Reagan University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Medical Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 757 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA.

Justin P McWilliamsDepartment of Radiology, Division of Interventional Radiology, Ronald Reagan University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Medical Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, 757 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA, 90095, USA. JuMcWilliams@mednet.ucla.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This retrospective study evaluates post-procedural symptom score changes after prostate artery embolization (PAE) with (Coil-out) and without (Standard) adjunctive prostate artery coiling after particle embolization. Changes in IPSS, QOL/Bother, and SHIM-IIEF V are reported at 1-5- and 9-15-month intervals. 573 procedures were reviewed, and 317 patients were included with a mean age of 72.1 years. Results favored the Standard group with greater IPSS reduction at 1-5 (-12.2 vs. -9.9, p = 0.018) and 9-15 months (-12.5 vs. -7.6, p = 0.018), and greater QOL/Bother improvement in the Standard group at 9-15 months (-2.8 vs. -1.8, p = 0.014). Procedure times were longer in the Standard group (186 vs. 173 min; p = 0.039), whereas fluoroscopy times were longer in the Coil-out group (48.3 vs. 44.8 min; p = 0.014). Though limited by retrospective nature and lack of longer-term follow-up, these results support particle embolization alone over adjunctive coil embolization for PAE.

Identifiers

PMID41721973

DOI10.1186/s42155-026-00660-4

PMCPMC12924814

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.