Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar
AI InsightHowever, the use of NBCA was associated with significantly shorter embolization times, which may offer a potential advantage in the management of acute arterial bleeding.
📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale
Abstract
Aims: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the technical success, clinical efficacy, and safety of N-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) versus coil embolization in the endovascular management of acute hemorrhage. Methods: Between July 2024 and November 2025, 33 patients who underwent embolization for acute bleeding, including abdominal wall, gastrointestinal, renal, soft tissue, and tumoral hemorrhages, were retrospectively analyzed. The study population consisted of the NBCA group (n=16) and the coil group (n=17). Technical success was defined as the complete angiographic occlusion of the target vessel and cessation of contrast extravasation. Clinical success was defined as symptomatic improvement during hospitalization without the need for re-intervention, recurrent bleeding, or mortality. Procedural times, success rates, and complication rates were compared between the two groups. Results: Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases in both groups. Clinical success rates were 87.5% (14/16) in the NBCA group and 76.5% (13/17) in the coil group. Embolization time was significantly shorter in the NBCA group (10.6±3.4 min) than in the coil group (22.0±15.4 min) (p=0.0079). Re-bleeding rates were 12.5% for the NBCA group and 23.5% for the coil group, showing no significant difference (p=0.407). No major complications or non-target embolization events occurred in either group. Conclusion: No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical success, re-bleeding, or complication rates between the NBCA and coil groups in our cohort. However, the use of NBCA was associated with significantly shorter embolization times, which may offer a potential advantage in the management of acute arterial bleeding.