ArticleCVIR endovascular2026
Assessment of particulate embolic agent distribution comparing two delivery techniques in a porcine model.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 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
objectiveTo compare continuous vs pulsed transarterial embolization techniques with microCT and determine their impact on distal vascular penetration. MATERIAL AND
methodsTransarterial embolization was performed in 7 swine using 75-100-micron microspheres. In each subject, 1 kidney was embolized using continuous injection and contralateral with a pulsed injection technique. Histological analysis validated MicroCT findings (50-100 pixels, postprocedural quantification) in 2 subjects (4 kidneys), after which MicroCT alone was used for outcome assessments.
resultsMicroCT imaging demonstrated similar outcomes to histology. Larger number of particles delivered with continuous vs pulsed technique (6806 vs 6174 particles into 223 ml vs 168 ml renal volume respectively). Percentage of the embolized renal cortex at 50 pixels was 1.1% for the continuous technique (0.1 - 2.3%) vs 0.7% pulsed (0.5 - 1.1%) (p = 0.3). Embolized renal cortex at 100 pixels was 2.9% continuous (1.3 - 4.2%) vs 2.3% pulsed (1.3 - 3.2%) (p = 0.3). Average kidney volume in both groups was 78.1 ml (r, 49-138) and 81 ml (r, 46-111), respectively. A slightly larger amount of embolic was delivered using the continuous vs pulsed: 14 ml (r, 12-20) vs 13.1 ml (r, 8-22). Mean embolic/kidney volume ratio was 0.20 for continuous vs 0.16 for pulsed (25% difference, p = 0.2).
conclusionContinuous embolization technique resulted in a larger absolute concentration of embolic particles within the distal renal cortex and overall volume compared to the pulsed technique, though the difference was not statistically significant. Our findings suggest embolic delivery technique for particle embolics may influence amount and efficacy of distal embolization.
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.