Observational studyJournal of medical imaging and radiation oncology2026
Embolic Agent Selection and Outcomes in Renal Angiomyolipoma Embolisation.
Observational study in Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interpreting Embolic Agent Comparisons in Renal Angiomyolipoma Embolisation.Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology · 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
purposeTo evaluate whether embolic agent selection influences outcomes following selective arterial embolisation (SAE) of renal angiomyolipomas (r-AMLs) and to assess procedural safety and effects on renal function. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective observational study was performed of all r-AML SAEs undertaken at a tertiary institution between 2015 and 2024. Change in tumour size on pre- and 3-6-month post-procedural imaging was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included technical success, re-intervention rates, complications (Clavien-Dindo), renal function change and length of hospital stay. Outcomes were compared across embolic agents including microparticles, liquid embolic agents, coils and combined approaches.
resultsForty-nine patients (51 lesions) underwent angiography, with SAE attempted in 54 procedures. Technical success was achieved in 91%. Tumour size reduction occurred in 91% of lesions with follow-up imaging, with a mean reduction of 1.75 cm (p < 0.0001). Liquid embolic agents alone demonstrated the greatest mean tumour reduction with a mean reduction of 2.4 cm and a 0% re-intervention rate. Microparticles alone achieved significant size reduction with a low re-intervention rate, while coil-only embolisation was associated with inferior outcomes and higher re-intervention rates. Combined embolisation strategies achieved significant tumour reduction but did not outperform liquid agents alone. Complications occurred in 10% of patients and were predominantly minor. No patient required renal replacement therapy, and the median eGFR did not change significantly.
conclusionSAE is a safe and effective treatment for r-AML in both elective and emergency settings. Liquid embolic agents achieved the greatest tumour reduction with low re-intervention rates, while coil-only embolisation showed inferior outcomes and should be avoided where possible.
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.