ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2025
Combining Reversible Electroporation and Bleomycin in Treatment of Arteriovenous Malformations.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electrochemotherapy in pediatrics: a systematic review.European radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Bleomycin Electrosclerotherapy and Skin Hyperpigmentation in Slow-flow Vascular Malformations: A Retrospective Monocentric Analysis.RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 2026Article
- Bleomycin electroembolotherapy in a rare mixed extra- and intracranial scalp-dural vascular malformation with high- and low-flow components.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Bleomycin ElectroScleroTherapy (BEST): mechanistic parallels to electrochemotherapy, experimental models, and unresolved questions.Radiology and oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to evaluate and compare safety and clinical outcomes of reversible electroporation with either intravenous (BEST) or intraarterial (BEET) Bleomycin application treating extracranial AVMs unsuitable for conventional approaches defined as fine-fistulous AVMs close to vulnerable anatomical structures (such as skin/end-arteries) not amenable for embolization or resection due to inappropriate risk/benefit and/or therapy-refractory or recurrent lesions. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a sub-analysis of the prospective multicenter APOLLON trial (German clinical trial register, DRKS00021019). Clinical and imaging findings were assessed at baseline and 6-month follow-up to evaluate subjective outcome (symptom-free, partial relief, no improvement, clinical progression) and AVM lesion devascularization on MRI (total, 100%; substantial, 76-99%; partial, 51-75%; slight, 50%; progression). BEST versus BEET was at the discretion of the operator; subgroup outcome comparisons were subsequently performed.
resultsTwenty-one AVM patients received 31 treatments (16/31 BEST, 51.6%; 15/31 BEET, 48.4%); the mean number of procedures per patient was 1.5 (± 0.7). Complications occurred after 7/31 (22.6%) procedures, including 6.4% major complications (delayed wound healing solved by split-skin transplantation, persistant scarring). Subjective outcome revealed partial symptom relief in 13/21 (61.9%) patients, and 4/21 (19.0%) patients presented symptom-free. In 4/21 (19.0%) patients, no improvement or symptom worsening was reported. Imaging revealed complete devascularization in one case (6.3%), substantial (76-99%) and partial (51-75%) devascularization in 6/16 (36.5%) patients, respectively, while progression was noted in 3/16 (18.8%) patients. Comparison of clinical outcomes differed between both approaches, with BEET being superior to BEST (p = 0.04).
conclusionThe combination of reversible electroporation and bleomycin is effective for treatment of AVMs; BEET tends to present superior to BEST regarding patients ' outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.