Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42850456›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Comparison of transbrachial and transfemoral venous access in varicocele embolization: impact on radiation dose and technical success.

Anna-Maria Odenthal, Alexander Marc Christian Böhner, Tatjana Dell, Carsten Meyer, Matthäus Reinert, Marilia Voigt, Julian Alexander Luetkens, Patrick Arthur Kupczyk

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 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.

Anna-Maria OdenthalDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany. anna-maria.odenthal@ukbonn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-9543-6023
Alexander Marc Christian BöhnerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Tatjana DellDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Carsten MeyerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Matthäus ReinertDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Marilia VoigtDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Julian Alexander LuetkensDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Patrick Arthur KupczykDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study evaluates the advantages of superficial venous transbrachial access compared to conventional transfemoral access in varicocele embolization, focusing on technical success and radiation dose reduction. MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 241 patients in whom 247 varicocele embolization procedures were performed via transbrachial (n = 145, 58.7%) or transfemoral (n = 102, 41.3%) venous access. Procedural parameters, including radiation exposure (fluoroscopy time and dose-area product), technical success, material consumption, and complications, were compared using propensity score matching (1:1).

resultsForty-one matched pairs of transbrachial and transfemoral accesses were analyzed. Technical success rates were similar between transbrachial (95.1%) and transfemoral access (82.9%, p = 0.15). Transfemoral access was associated with a significantly higher dose-area product (ratio of geometric means 1.68, 95% CI: 1.06-2.66, p = 0.032), corresponding to a 68% increase. Additionally, the transfemoral approach was associated with a significantly longer fluoroscopy time (+ 608 s, 95% CI: 28- 1188 s, p = 0.043) and procedural time (1:15 [0:59-1:33] vs 1:39 [1:00-2:05] h; p = 0.04). There were no significant differences in overall and access-site-related complications.

conclusionThe transbrachial approach may reduce radiation exposure and potentially improve the technical success rate in varicocele embolization, particularly in bilateral embolization, while maintaining procedural safety. Given that this procedure is typically performed in young, otherwise healthy men, a transbrachial access should be considered as a beneficial alternative. KEY POINTS: Question Radiation dose reduction is essential in varicocele embolization performed in young, healthy patients, but the impact of venous access site on radiation exposure and procedural performance remains unclear. Findings In varicocele embolization, transbrachial venous access resulted in lower radiation dose, procedural time, and material consumption, while potentially offering a slightly higher technical success rate. Clinical relevance Transbrachial venous access should be considered an appealing alternative to the transfemoral approach in varicocele embolization, as it is associated with reduced radiation exposure in a predominantly young and otherwise healthy patient population.

Indexed as

EmbolizationRadiation doseVaricoceleVenous intervention

Identifiers

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.