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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |