ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Modified pressure cooker vs. push-and-plug technique in transarterial embolization for brain arteriovenous malformations: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study retrospectively analyzed patients with brain arteriovenous malformation (bAVM) treated by transarterial curative embolization using either the modified pressure cooker technique (mPCT) or the conventional push-and-plug technique (PPT). The primary objective was to assess mPCT's safety and efficacy by comparing occlusion rates and complications with PPT. Materials and methods: Data were retrospectively collected from all bAVM patients who underwent transarterial curative embolization at our institution between April 2019 and April 2023. A total of 188 patients were included, with 61 treated using the mPCT and 127 with the PPT. Baseline characteristics, angiographic and clinical outcome, complications and follow-up data were systematically evaluated and analyzed. Lesions were categorized into two groups according to Spetzler-Martin grade (SMG): SMG I-III and SMG IV-V. Furthermore, multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent risk factors for incomplete obliteration. Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two groups. Immediately after the procedure, the mPCT group achieved a complete obliteration rate of 49.2% compared with 34.6% in the PPT group ( Conclusion: Overall, occlusion rates did not differ significantly between mPCT and PPT, but mPCT achieved higher rates in SMG I-III lesions with comparable complication rates, suggesting potential benefits in selected cases that require confirmation in larger prospective cohorts with longer follow-up.
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.