Background: Endovascular treatment of abdominal wall hematomas (AWHs) has been increasingly used when conservative treatments were not sufficiently effective, and it is often preferred to surgical interventions. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and technical and clinical success of percutaneous transarterial treatment of AWH and to evaluate the efficacy of blind embolization compared to targeted embolization. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 43 patients (23 men and 20 females) with spontaneous AWH who underwent digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and embolization, focusing on the presence of signs of bleeding at pre-procedural CT-Angiography (CTA) and at DSA. Furthermore, we divided patients into two groups depending on blind or targeted embolization approaches. Results: The mean age of the study population was 71 ± 12 years. CTA revealed signs of active bleeding in 31 patients (72%). DSA showed signs of active bleeding in 34 patients (79%). In nine patients (21%), blind embolization was performed. The overall technical success rate was 100%. Clinical success was achieved in 33 patients (77%), while 10 patients (23%) rebled within 96 h, and all of them were re-treated. No major peri-procedural complication was reported. The comparison between blind and targeted embolization showed no statistically significant differences for characteristics of groups and for clinical success rates (78% and 77%, respectively, −p = 0.71). The technical success was 100% in both groups. Conclusions: Our study confirms that transarterial embolization is a safe and effective option for the treatment of spontaneous AWHs, and it suggests that the efficacy and safety of blind embolization is comparable to non-blind.
Efficacy of Percutaneous Transarterial Embolization in Patients with Spontaneous Abdominal Wall Hematoma and Comparison between Blind and Targeted Embolization Approaches
Venturini M.;
2022-01-01
Abstract
Background: Endovascular treatment of abdominal wall hematomas (AWHs) has been increasingly used when conservative treatments were not sufficiently effective, and it is often preferred to surgical interventions. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and technical and clinical success of percutaneous transarterial treatment of AWH and to evaluate the efficacy of blind embolization compared to targeted embolization. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 43 patients (23 men and 20 females) with spontaneous AWH who underwent digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and embolization, focusing on the presence of signs of bleeding at pre-procedural CT-Angiography (CTA) and at DSA. Furthermore, we divided patients into two groups depending on blind or targeted embolization approaches. Results: The mean age of the study population was 71 ± 12 years. CTA revealed signs of active bleeding in 31 patients (72%). DSA showed signs of active bleeding in 34 patients (79%). In nine patients (21%), blind embolization was performed. The overall technical success rate was 100%. Clinical success was achieved in 33 patients (77%), while 10 patients (23%) rebled within 96 h, and all of them were re-treated. No major peri-procedural complication was reported. The comparison between blind and targeted embolization showed no statistically significant differences for characteristics of groups and for clinical success rates (78% and 77%, respectively, −p = 0.71). The technical success was 100% in both groups. Conclusions: Our study confirms that transarterial embolization is a safe and effective option for the treatment of spontaneous AWHs, and it suggests that the efficacy and safety of blind embolization is comparable to non-blind.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
J CLIN MED 2022 Wall Hematoma Emb.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
2.11 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.11 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.