Cargando…

Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis

The optimal treatment for intractable epistaxis is still controversial. Various studies have demonstrated high success rates and low complication rates for endovascular embolization. Herein, the authors report an institutional experience and meta-analysis in terms of efficacy and safety of endovascu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: El Naamani, Kareem, Morse, Charles, Ghanem, Marc, Barbera, Julie, Amllay, Abdelaziz, Severance, Grace, Ruiz, Ramon, Sweid, Ahmad, Gooch, Michael R., Herial, Nabeel A., Jabbour, Pascal, Rosenwasser, Robert H., Nyquist, Gurston G., Tjoumakaris, Stavropoula
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10672438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38002574
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12226958
_version_ 1785140391305019392
author El Naamani, Kareem
Morse, Charles
Ghanem, Marc
Barbera, Julie
Amllay, Abdelaziz
Severance, Grace
Ruiz, Ramon
Sweid, Ahmad
Gooch, Michael R.
Herial, Nabeel A.
Jabbour, Pascal
Rosenwasser, Robert H.
Nyquist, Gurston G.
Tjoumakaris, Stavropoula
author_facet El Naamani, Kareem
Morse, Charles
Ghanem, Marc
Barbera, Julie
Amllay, Abdelaziz
Severance, Grace
Ruiz, Ramon
Sweid, Ahmad
Gooch, Michael R.
Herial, Nabeel A.
Jabbour, Pascal
Rosenwasser, Robert H.
Nyquist, Gurston G.
Tjoumakaris, Stavropoula
author_sort El Naamani, Kareem
collection PubMed
description The optimal treatment for intractable epistaxis is still controversial. Various studies have demonstrated high success rates and low complication rates for endovascular embolization. Herein, the authors report an institutional experience and meta-analysis in terms of efficacy and safety of endovascular embolization of intractable epistaxis. This was a retrospective observational study of 35 patients with epistaxis who underwent 40 embolization procedures between 2010 and 2023. The primary outcome was immediate success defined by immediate cessation of epistaxis at the end of the procedure. Immediate success was achieved in most of the procedures (39, 97.5%). During follow-up, three (7.5%) patients experienced a rebleed. Forty-one studies from 3595 articles were identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis and comprised 1632 patients. The mean pooled age was 57.5 years (95% CI: 57.2–57.8) and most patients were males (mean: 70.4, 95% CI: 69.8–71.0). Immediate success was achieved at a pooled mean of 90.9% (95% CI: 90.4–91.4) and rebleeding was observed at a pooled mean of 17% (95% CI: 16.5–17.5). In conclusion, endovascular embolization proved to be both safe and effective in treating intractable epistaxis carrying a low risk of post-operative stroke.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10672438
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106724382023-11-07 Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis El Naamani, Kareem Morse, Charles Ghanem, Marc Barbera, Julie Amllay, Abdelaziz Severance, Grace Ruiz, Ramon Sweid, Ahmad Gooch, Michael R. Herial, Nabeel A. Jabbour, Pascal Rosenwasser, Robert H. Nyquist, Gurston G. Tjoumakaris, Stavropoula J Clin Med Review The optimal treatment for intractable epistaxis is still controversial. Various studies have demonstrated high success rates and low complication rates for endovascular embolization. Herein, the authors report an institutional experience and meta-analysis in terms of efficacy and safety of endovascular embolization of intractable epistaxis. This was a retrospective observational study of 35 patients with epistaxis who underwent 40 embolization procedures between 2010 and 2023. The primary outcome was immediate success defined by immediate cessation of epistaxis at the end of the procedure. Immediate success was achieved in most of the procedures (39, 97.5%). During follow-up, three (7.5%) patients experienced a rebleed. Forty-one studies from 3595 articles were identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis and comprised 1632 patients. The mean pooled age was 57.5 years (95% CI: 57.2–57.8) and most patients were males (mean: 70.4, 95% CI: 69.8–71.0). Immediate success was achieved at a pooled mean of 90.9% (95% CI: 90.4–91.4) and rebleeding was observed at a pooled mean of 17% (95% CI: 16.5–17.5). In conclusion, endovascular embolization proved to be both safe and effective in treating intractable epistaxis carrying a low risk of post-operative stroke. MDPI 2023-11-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10672438/ /pubmed/38002574 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12226958 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
El Naamani, Kareem
Morse, Charles
Ghanem, Marc
Barbera, Julie
Amllay, Abdelaziz
Severance, Grace
Ruiz, Ramon
Sweid, Ahmad
Gooch, Michael R.
Herial, Nabeel A.
Jabbour, Pascal
Rosenwasser, Robert H.
Nyquist, Gurston G.
Tjoumakaris, Stavropoula
Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis
title Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis
title_full Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis
title_short Endovascular Embolization for Epistaxis: A Single Center Experience and Meta-Analysis
title_sort endovascular embolization for epistaxis: a single center experience and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10672438/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38002574
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12226958
work_keys_str_mv AT elnaamanikareem endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT morsecharles endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT ghanemmarc endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT barberajulie endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT amllayabdelaziz endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT severancegrace endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT ruizramon endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT sweidahmad endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT goochmichaelr endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT herialnabeela endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT jabbourpascal endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT rosenwasserroberth endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT nyquistgurstong endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis
AT tjoumakarisstavropoula endovascularembolizationforepistaxisasinglecenterexperienceandmetaanalysis