Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
4,807 result(s) for "Embolization, Therapeutic - methods"
Sort by:
Embolization of the middle meningeal artery for the prevention of chronic subdural hematoma recurrence in high-risk patients: a randomized controlled trial—the EMPROTECT study protocol
BackgroundMiddle meningeal artery (MMA) embolization has been proposed as a treatment of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH). The benefit of the procedure has yet to be demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial. We aim to assess the efficacy of MMA embolization in reducing the risk of CSDH recurrence 6 months after burr-hole surgery compared with standard medical treatment in patients at high risk of postoperative recurrence.MethodsThe EMPROTECT trial is a multicenter open label randomized controlled trial (RCT) involving 12 French centers. Adult patients (≥18 years) operated for CSDH recurrence or for a first episode with a predefined recurrence risk factor are randomized 1:1 to receive either MMA embolization within 7 days of the burr-hole surgery (experimental group) or standard medical care (control group). The number of patients to be included is 342.ResultsThe primary outcome is the rate of CSDH recurrence at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include the rate of repeated surgery for a homolateral CSDH recurrence during the 6-month follow-up period, the rate of disability and dependency at 1 and 6 months, defined by a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≥4, mortality at 1 and 6 months, total cumulative duration of hospital stay during the 6-month follow-up period, directly or indirectly related to the CSDH and embolization procedure-related complication rates.ConclusionsThe EMPROTECT trial is the first RCT evaluating the benefit of MMA embolization as a surgical adjunct for the prevention of CSDH recurrence. If positive, this trial will have a significant impact on patient care.Trial registration numberNCT04372147.
Adjunctive Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for Subdural Hematoma
In patients with subdural hematoma and an indication for surgical evacuation, middle meningeal artery embolization plus surgery led to a lower risk of reoperation for recurrence or progression within 90 days than surgery alone.
Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for Nonacute Subdural Hematoma
Among patients with nonacute subdural hematoma, middle meningeal artery embolization led to a 90-day incidence of symptomatic recurrence or progression similar to that with usual care but with fewer serious adverse events.
Embolization of the Middle Meningeal Artery for Chronic Subdural Hematoma
Among patients receiving surgical or nonsurgical standard treatment for chronic subdural hematoma, adjunctive middle meningeal artery embolization reduced the risk of treatment failure within 180 days.
The durability of endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping of ruptured cerebral aneurysms: 18 year follow-up of the UK cohort of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT)
Previous analyses of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) cohort have reported on the risks of recurrent subarachnoid haemorrhage and death or dependency for a minimum of 5 years and up to a maximum of 14 years after treatment of a ruptured intracranial aneurysm with either neurosurgical clipping or endovascular coiling. At 1 year there was a 7% absolute and a 24% relative risk reduction of death and dependency in the coiling group compared with the clipping group, but the medium-term results showed the increased need for re-treatment of the target aneurysm in the patients given coiling. We report the long-term follow-up of patients in this UK cohort. In ISAT, patients were randomly allocated to either neurosurgical clipping or endovascular coiling after a subarachnoid haemorrhage, assuming treatment equipoise, between Sept 12, 1994, and May 1, 2002. We followed up 1644 patients in 22 UK neurosurgical centres for death and clinical outcomes for 10·0–18·5 years. We assessed dependency as self-reported modified Rankin scale score obtained through yearly questionnaires. Data for recurrent aneurysms and rebleeding events were collected from questionnaires and from hospital and general practitioner records. The Office for National Statistics supplied data on deaths. This study is registered, number ISRCTN49866681. At 10 years, 674 (83%) of 809 patients allocated endovascular coiling and 657 (79%) of 835 patients allocated neurosurgical clipping were alive (odds ratio [OR] 1·35, 95% CI 1·06–1·73). Of 1003 individuals who returned a questionnaire at 10 years, 435 (82%) patients treated with endovascular coiling and 370 (78%) patients treated with neurosurgical clipping were independent (modified Rankin scale score 0–2; OR 1·25; 95% CI 0·92–1·71). Patients in the endovascular treatment group were more likely to be alive and independent at 10 years than were patients in the neurosurgery group (OR 1·34, 95% CI 1·07–1·67). 33 patients had a recurrent subarachnoid haemorrhage more than 1 year after their initial haemorrhage (17 from the target aneurysm). Although rates of increased dependency alone did not differ between groups, the probability of death or dependency was significantly greater in the neurosurgical group than in the endovascular group. Rebleeding was more likely after endovascular coiling than after neurosurgical clipping, but the risk was small and the probability of disability-free survival was significantly greater in the endovascular group than in the neurosurgical group at 10 years. UK Medical Research Council.
Medical management with interventional therapy versus medical management alone for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA): final follow-up of a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised controlled trial
In A Randomized trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA), randomisation was halted at a mean follow-up of 33·3 months after a prespecified interim analysis showed that medical management alone was superior to the combination of medical management and interventional therapy in preventing symptomatic stroke or death. We aimed to study whether these differences persisted through 5-years' follow-up. ARUBA was a non-blinded, randomised trial done at 39 clinical centres in nine countries. Adults (age ≥18 years) diagnosed with an unruptured brain arteriovenous malformation, who had never undergone interventional therapy, and were considered by participating clinical centres to be suitable for intervention to eradicate the lesion, were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based data collection system, stratified by clinical centre in a random permuted block design with block sizes of two, four, and six, to medical management alone or with interventional therapy (neurosurgery, embolisation, or stereotactic radiotherapy, alone or in any combination, sequence, or number). Although patients and investigators at a given centre were not masked to treatment assignment, investigators at other centres and those in the clinical coordinating centre were not informed of assignment or outcomes at any of the centres. The primary outcome was time to death or symptomatic stroke confirmed by imaging, assessed by a neurologist at each centre not involved in the management of participants' care, and monitored by an independent committee using an adaptive approach with interim analyses. Enrolment began on April 4, 2007, and was halted on April 15, 2013, after which follow-up continued until July 15, 2015. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00389181. Of 1740 patients screened, 226 were randomly assigned to medical management alone (n=110) or medical management plus interventional therapy (n=116). During a mean follow-up of 50·4 months (SD 22·9), the incidence of death or symptomatic stroke was lower with medical management alone (15 of 110, 3·39 per 100 patient-years) than with medical management with interventional therapy (41 of 116, 12·32 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio 0·31, 95% CI 0·17 to 0·56). Two patients in the medical management group and four in the interventional therapy group (two attributed to intervention) died during follow-up. Adverse events were observed less often in patients allocated to medical management compared with interventional therapy (283 vs 369; 58·97 vs 78·73 per 100 patient-years; risk difference −19·76, 95% CI −30·33 to −9·19). After extended follow-up, ARUBA showed that medical management alone remained superior to interventional therapy for the prevention of death or symptomatic stroke in patients with an unruptured brain arteriovenous malformation. The data concerning the disparity in outcomes should affect standard specialist practice and the information presented to patients. The even longer-term risks and differences between the two therapeutic approaches remains uncertain. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke for the randomisation phase and Vital Projects Fund for the follow-up phase.
Comparison of prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) versus transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia: randomised, open label, non-inferiority trial
AbstractObjectiveTo compare prostatic artery embolisation (PAE) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia in terms of patient reported and functional outcomes.DesignRandomised, open label, non-inferiority trial.SettingUrology and radiology departments of a Swiss tertiary care centre.Participants103 patients aged ≥40 years with refractory lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomised between 11 February 2014 and 24 May 2017; 48 and 51 patients reached the primary endpoint 12 weeks after PAE and TURP, respectively.InterventionsPAE performed with 250-400 μm microspheres under local anaesthesia versus monopolar TURP performed under spinal or general anaesthesia.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was change in international prostate symptoms score (IPSS) from baseline to 12 weeks after surgery; a difference of less than 3 points between treatments was defined as non-inferiority for PAE and tested with a one sided t test. Secondary outcomes included further questionnaires, functional measures, magnetic resonance imaging findings, and adverse events; changes from baseline to 12 weeks were compared between treatments with two sided tests for superiority.ResultsMean reduction in IPSS from baseline to 12 weeks was −9.23 points after PAE and −10.77 points after TURP. Although the difference was less than 3 points (1.54 points in favour of TURP (95% confidence interval −1.45 to 4.52)), non-inferiority of PAE could not be shown (P=0.17). None of the patient reported secondary outcomes differed significantly between treatments when tested for superiority; IPSS also did not differ significantly (P=0.31). At 12 weeks, PAE was less effective than TURP regarding changes in maximum rate of urinary flow (5.19 v 15.34 mL/s; difference 10.15 (95% confidence interval −14.67 to −5.63); P<0.001), postvoid residual urine (−86.36 v −199.98 mL; 113.62 (39.25 to 187.98); P=0.003), prostate volume (−12.17 v −30.27 mL; 18.11 (10.11 to 26.10); P<0.001), and desobstructive effectiveness according to pressure flow studies (56% v 93% shift towards less obstructive category; P=0.003). Fewer adverse events occurred after PAE than after TURP (36 v 70 events; P=0.003).ConclusionsThe improvement in lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia seen 12 weeks after PAE is close to that after TURP. PAE is associated with fewer complications than TURP but has disadvantages regarding functional outcomes, which should be considered when selecting patients. Further comparative study findings, including longer follow-up, should be evaluated before PAE can be considered as a routine treatment.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02054013.
Medical management with or without interventional therapy for unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA): a multicentre, non-blinded, randomised trial
The clinical benefit of preventive eradication of unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations remains uncertain. A Randomised trial of Unruptured Brain Arteriovenous malformations (ARUBA) aims to compare the risk of death and symptomatic stroke in patients with an unruptured brain arteriovenous malformation who are allocated to either medical management alone or medical management with interventional therapy. Adult patients (≥18 years) with an unruptured brain arteriovenous malformation were enrolled into this trial at 39 clinical sites in nine countries. Patients were randomised (by web-based system, in a 1:1 ratio, with random permuted block design [block size 2, 4, or 6], stratified by clinical site) to medical management with interventional therapy (ie, neurosurgery, embolisation, or stereotactic radiotherapy, alone or in combination) or medical management alone (ie, pharmacological therapy for neurological symptoms as needed). Patients, clinicians, and investigators are aware of treatment assignment. The primary outcome is time to the composite endpoint of death or symptomatic stroke; the primary analysis is by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00389181. Randomisation was started on April 4, 2007, and was stopped on April 15, 2013, when a data and safety monitoring board appointed by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke of the National Institutes of Health recommended halting randomisation because of superiority of the medical management group (log-rank Z statistic of 4·10, exceeding the prespecified stopping boundary value of 2·87). At this point, outcome data were available for 223 patients (mean follow-up 33·3 months [SD 19·7]), 114 assigned to interventional therapy and 109 to medical management. The primary endpoint had been reached by 11 (10·1%) patients in the medical management group compared with 35 (30·7%) in the interventional therapy group. The risk of death or stroke was significantly lower in the medical management group than in the interventional therapy group (hazard ratio 0·27, 95% CI 0·14–0·54). No harms were identified, other than a higher number of strokes (45 vs 12, p<0·0001) and neurological deficits unrelated to stroke (14 vs 1, p=0·0008) in patients allocated to interventional therapy compared with medical management. The ARUBA trial showed that medical management alone is superior to medical management with interventional therapy for the prevention of death or stroke in patients with unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations followed up for 33 months. The trial is continuing its observational phase to establish whether the disparities will persist over an additional 5 years of follow-up. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) Versus Original and PErFecTED Prostate Artery Embolization (PAE) Due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH): Preliminary Results of a Single Center, Prospective, Urodynamic-Controlled Analysis
Purpose To compare clinical and urodynamic results of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to original and PErFecTED prostate artery embolization (PAE) methods for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods We prospectively randomized 30 patients to receive TURP or original PAE (oPAE) and compared them to a cohort of patients treated by PErFecTED PAE, with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Patients were assessed for urodynamic parameters, prostate volume, international prostate symptom score (IPSS), and quality of life (QoL). Results All groups were comparable for all pre-treatment parameters except bladder contractility and peak urine flow rate ( Q max ), both of which were significantly better in the TURP group, and IIEF score, which was significantly higher among PErFecTED PAE patients than TURP patients. All groups experienced significant improvement in IPSS, QoL, prostate volume, and Q max . TURP and PErFecTED PAE both resulted in significantly lower IPSS than oPAE but were not significantly different from one another. TURP resulted in significantly higher Q max and significantly smaller prostate volume than either original or PErFecTED PAE but required spinal anesthesia and hospitalization. Two patients in the oPAE group with hypocontractile bladders experienced recurrence of symptoms and were treated with TURP. In the TURP group, urinary incontinence occurred in 4/15 patients (26.7 %), rupture of the prostatic capsule in 1/15 (6.7 %), retrograde ejaculation in all patients (100 %), and one patient was readmitted for temporary bladder irrigation due to hematuria. Conclusions TURP and PAE are both safe and effective treatments. TURP and PErFecTED PAE yield similar symptom improvement, but TURP is associated with both better urodynamic results and more adverse events.
Study protocol of the HYPER-LIV01 trial: a multicenter phase II, prospective and randomized study comparing simultaneous portal and hepatic vein embolization to portal vein embolization for hypertrophy of the future liver remnant before major hepatectomy for colo-rectal liver metastases
Background In patients undergoing major liver resection, portal vein embolization (PVE) has been widely used to induce hypertrophy of the non-embolized liver in order to prevent post-hepatectomy liver failure. PVE is a safe and effective procedure, but does not always lead to sufficient hypertrophy of the future liver remnant (FLR). Hepatic vein(s) embolization has been proposed to improve FLR regeneration when insufficient after PVE. The sequential right hepatic vein embolization (HVE) after right PVE demonstrated an incremental effect on the FLR but it implies two different procedures with no time gain as compared to PVE alone. We have developed the so-called liver venous deprivation (LVD), a combination of PVE and HVE during the same intervention, to optimize the phase of liver preparation before surgery. The main objective of this randomized phase II trial is to compare the percentage of change in FLR volume at 3 weeks after LVD or PVE. Methods Patients eligible to this multicenter prospective randomized phase II study are subjects aged from 18 years old suffering from colo-rectal liver metastases considered as resectable and with non-cirrhotic liver parenchyma. The primary objective is the percentage of change in FLR volume at 3 weeks after LVD or PVE using MRI or CT-Scan. Secondary objectives are assessment of tolerance, post-operative morbidity and mortality, post-hepatectomy liver failure, rate of non-respectability due to insufficient FLR or tumor progression, per-operative difficulties, blood loss, R0 resection rate, post-operative liver volume and overall survival. Objectives of translational research studies are evaluation of pre- and post-operative liver function and determination of biomarkers predictive of liver hypertrophy . Sixty-four patients will be included (randomization ratio 1:1) to detect a difference of 12% at 21 days in FLR volumes between PVE and LVD. Discussion Adding HVE to PVE during the same procedure is an innovative and promising approach that may lead to a rapid and major increase in volume and function of the FLR, thereby increasing the rate of resectable patients and limiting the risk of patient’s drop-out. Trial registration This study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov on 15th February 2019 ( NCT03841305 ).