Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42571790›Full record

SynthesisJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2026

Pelvic vein embolization using different embolic agents for the treatment of pelvic venous insufficiency: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Felix Strobl, Agnes Klara Böhm, Lorenz Mertens, Maximilian de Bucourt, Jan Paul Frese, Houman Jalaie, Andreas Greiner, Leon Bruder

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 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

8 authors.

Felix StroblDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: Felix.Strobl@charite.de.
Agnes Klara BöhmDepartment of Surgery, Experimental Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Lorenz MertensDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Maximilian de BucourtDepartment of Radiology, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Jan Paul FreseDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Houman JalaieDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Andreas GreinerDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Leon BruderDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEmbolization of insufficient pelvic veins has been established as the standard first-line therapy in women with chronic pain due to pelvic venous disorder; however, the clinically available embolic devices vary widely, with coils, vascular plugs, glue, and sclerosants or combinations of these devices being the most common. This study aims to evaluate the ability of different devices to reduce pain and their individual rates of success and complications.

methodsA systematic search was conducted using PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published on the embolization of insufficient pelvic veins up until November 2025. The primary outcome measure was the effect of embolization on pelvic pain as measured using visual analog scale (VAS). The secondary end points were the technical and clinical success rates as well as the recurrence, complication, and reintervention rates.

resultsA total of 28 studies met the inclusion criteria, totaling 2688 patients across 34 individual cohorts who were grouped into five treatment categories. The technical success rate was high across all the embolization methods, ranging from 98.6% to 100%, and the clinical success rate ranged from 68.3% to 100%. All the endovascular treatment options led to a reduction in pain as measured using VAS, which ranged from 4.67 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.87-5.47) points reduction in the sclerosant-only group to 6.12 (95% CI, 5.46-6.78) in the vascular plugs group. The clinical success rate was the highest in the sclerosant-only and plugs groups at 97.5% (95% CI, 93.7-99.3) and 94.7% (95% CI, 86.9-98.5), respectively. Complications, especially in the form of device migration, most frequently appeared in the coils group at 2.63% (95% CI, 1.76-3.78) and least frequently in the sclerosant-only group at 0.45% (95% CI, 0.01-2.48). Sclerosants led to the lowest recurrence at 1.69% (95% CI, 0.49-4.87) but the highest number of reinterventions at 13.3% (95% CI, 5.1-26.8). Vascular plugs resulted in few complications (0.6% [95% CI, 0.07-2.15]), as well as low recurrence (3.47% [95% CI, 1.6-6.49]) and reintervention (2.59% [95% CI, 1.12-5.04]).

conclusionsAll the embolization methods showed excellent technical success rates and marked reduction in pain as measured using VAS. Using coils seems to be associated with the highest occurrence of device migration. The vascular plugs and sclerosant-only groups had high clinical success with low complication rates. Due to the small sample sizes and lack of inter-group comparisons, the conclusions should be viewed cautiously.

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticPelvic PainPelvisSclerosing SolutionsVenous InsufficiencyAdultFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeSclerosing SolutionsChronic pelvic painEmbolizationPelvic congestion syndromePelvic venous disorderVenous insufficiency

Identifiers

PMID42571790
PMCPMC13590090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.