ReviewFrontiers in medicine2026
Rectal artery embolization: recent advances and research progress.
Review in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rectal artery embolization (RAE), or the Emborrhoid technique, is a new minimally invasive treatment for bleeding internal hemorrhoids. This review examines vessel selection, embolic materials, procedural success, recurrence, and safety. Technical success involves successful catheterization and occlusion of target arteries, while clinical success means symptom improvement without further treatment. Studies show consistently high technical success but variable clinical success. One meta-analysis found mean technical and clinical success rates of 97.8% and 78.9%, respectively, while another reported pooled estimates of 99% and 82%. Definitions, sample sizes, and follow-up vary across studies. In an 80-patient study, 68.7% had no rectal bleeding after 12 months, while 31.3% experienced recurrence, and 21.3% needed repeat embolization. A separate study with 42 patients showed 93% success but a 54% rate of minor mucosal injury. Current evidence favors superselective superior rectal artery embolization as the primary approach, with selective assessment of middle rectal artery inflow. There's insufficient evidence to broadly recommend large microspheres and liquid agents. Standardized outcomes, clear denominators, and longer follow-up are needed.
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.