ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided angioembolization using cyanoacrylate for management of refractory non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND STUDY
aimsRefractory non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) remains a clinical challenge. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided angioembolization (EUS-A) may offer a salvage hemostatic approach, but evidence is limited. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-A for management of refractory NVUGIB.
methodsTwenty-eight patients with NVUGIB who underwent EUS-A at The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from January 2023 to December 2025 were enrolled in this study. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided intravascular cyanoacrylate injection was carried out when patients had failed and/or were deemed unsuitable candidates for standard therapies. The data were retrospectively collected.
resultsA total of 28 patients underwent 30 EUS-A procedures. Among these, 8 cases were due to bleeding from benign lesions. The technical success rate was 100% (8/8; 95% CI, 0.63-1), 30-day rebleeding rate was 0% (0/8; 95% CI: 0-0.37), clinical success rate was 100% (8/8; 95% CI: 0.63-1), and bleeding-related mortality rate was 0% (0/8; 95% CI: 0-0.37). The 20 cases were due to bleeding from malignant lesions. The technical success rate was 100% (22/22; 95% CI: 0.85-1), 30-day rebleeding rate was 22.7% (5/22; 95% CI: 0.08-0.45), clinical success rate was 77.3% (17/22; 95% CI: 0.55-0.92), and bleeding-related mortality rate was 15.0% (3/20; 95% CI: 0.03-0.38). The overall technical success rate was 100% (30/30; 95% CI: 0.88-1), 30-day rebleeding rate was 16.7% (5/30; 95% CI: 0.06-0.35), clinical success rate was 83.3% (25/30; 95% CI: 0.65-0.94), and bleeding-related mortality rate was 10.7% (3/28; 95% CI: 0.02-0.28). No procedure-related complications such as perforation or ectopic embolism occurred.
conclusionEUS-A using cyanoacrylate may be a feasible alternative for select patients with NVUGIB who have failed or are unsuitable for standard therapies, particularly those with malignancy-related bleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42717047What 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.