Benefits of Preoperative Embolization in Surgery for Hypervascular Spinal Tumors: A Meta-Analysis.
메타분석
2/5 보강
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
225 patients in group NE and 340 in group E.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
This suggests that the perceived advantages may reflect confounding factors rather than the true effect of embolization. However, surgical equipoise remains, and the decision to embolize should be individualized based on surgical and patient-related factors.
OpenAlex 토픽 ·
Management of metastatic bone disease
Spinal Hematomas and Complications
Vascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
[STUDY DESIGN] Meta-analysis.
- p-value P =0.05
- 95% CI 2.21-563.95
- 연구 설계 Meta-analysis
APA
Mohammad Daher, Tarek Nahle, et al. (2026). Benefits of Preoperative Embolization in Surgery for Hypervascular Spinal Tumors: A Meta-Analysis.. Spine, 51(9), E229-E239. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005635
MLA
Mohammad Daher, et al.. "Benefits of Preoperative Embolization in Surgery for Hypervascular Spinal Tumors: A Meta-Analysis.." Spine, vol. 51, no. 9, 2026, pp. E229-E239.
PMID
41626732 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
[STUDY DESIGN] Meta-analysis.
[OBJECTIVE] The purpose of this meta-analysis is to appraise the evidence comparing surgical outcomes with and without preoperative embolization.
[BACKGROUND] Hypervascular tumors present a surgical challenge due to their substantial intraoperative blood loss. Although preoperative embolization is often used to mitigate intraoperative bleeding, its consistent advantage has not been conclusively demonstrated across existing studies.
[MATERIALS AND METHODS] Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were accessed and explored until May 2025. Articles were included if they reported comparative studies evaluating perioperative outcomes of preoperative embolization (E) versus no embolization (NE) in the surgical treatment of hypervascular spinal tumors. A subanalysis was performed based on whether studies reported no statistically significant difference in surgical invasiveness between the two groups.
[RESULTS] Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including 225 patients in group NE and 340 in group E. When all studies were analyzed collectively, no significant differences were observed between the NE group and the E group for any of the outcomes. However, in the subgroup of studies that reported no statistically significant differences in surgical invasiveness, there was no significant difference in blood loss ( P =0.75) between the NE group and the E group. In contrast, in the other subgroup of studies, the NE group showed greater blood loss (mean difference=283.08 mL; 95% CI: 2.21-563.95; P =0.05).
[CONCLUSION] Preoperative embolization was not associated with consistent benefits in surgical outcomes for hypervascular spinal tumors. While some studies reported reduced blood loss with embolization, these findings were limited to analyses lacking control for specific surgical characteristics. This suggests that the perceived advantages may reflect confounding factors rather than the true effect of embolization. However, surgical equipoise remains, and the decision to embolize should be individualized based on surgical and patient-related factors.
[LEVEL OF EVIDENCE] Level III.
[OBJECTIVE] The purpose of this meta-analysis is to appraise the evidence comparing surgical outcomes with and without preoperative embolization.
[BACKGROUND] Hypervascular tumors present a surgical challenge due to their substantial intraoperative blood loss. Although preoperative embolization is often used to mitigate intraoperative bleeding, its consistent advantage has not been conclusively demonstrated across existing studies.
[MATERIALS AND METHODS] Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were accessed and explored until May 2025. Articles were included if they reported comparative studies evaluating perioperative outcomes of preoperative embolization (E) versus no embolization (NE) in the surgical treatment of hypervascular spinal tumors. A subanalysis was performed based on whether studies reported no statistically significant difference in surgical invasiveness between the two groups.
[RESULTS] Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, including 225 patients in group NE and 340 in group E. When all studies were analyzed collectively, no significant differences were observed between the NE group and the E group for any of the outcomes. However, in the subgroup of studies that reported no statistically significant differences in surgical invasiveness, there was no significant difference in blood loss ( P =0.75) between the NE group and the E group. In contrast, in the other subgroup of studies, the NE group showed greater blood loss (mean difference=283.08 mL; 95% CI: 2.21-563.95; P =0.05).
[CONCLUSION] Preoperative embolization was not associated with consistent benefits in surgical outcomes for hypervascular spinal tumors. While some studies reported reduced blood loss with embolization, these findings were limited to analyses lacking control for specific surgical characteristics. This suggests that the perceived advantages may reflect confounding factors rather than the true effect of embolization. However, surgical equipoise remains, and the decision to embolize should be individualized based on surgical and patient-related factors.
[LEVEL OF EVIDENCE] Level III.
🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만
같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (3)
- The Association Between Perioperative Denosumab and Local Recurrence After Surgical Management of Giant Cell Tumors: A Meta-Analysis.
- The eutrophic rhytidoplasty: Subdermal tunneling and minimal skin undermining.
- [Silicone implants and breast cancer: real or fictitious problem? A case report and review of the literature].
🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반
- A Phase I Study of Hydroxychloroquine and Suba-Itraconazole in Men with Biochemical Relapse of Prostate Cancer (HITMAN-PC): Dose Escalation Results.
- Self-management of male urinary symptoms: qualitative findings from a primary care trial.
- Clinical and Liquid Biomarkers of 20-Year Prostate Cancer Risk in Men Aged 45 to 70 Years.
- Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus multiparametric MRI for preoperative pelvic invasion in the patients with prostate cancer.
- Comprehensive analysis of androgen receptor splice variant target gene expression in prostate cancer.
- Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Surgery for Thyroid Cancer.