Prophylactic Embolization of the Cystic Artery Before Radioembolization: Feasibility, Safety, and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of two different methods of proximal cystic artery embolization in patients undergoing yttrium-90 radioembolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-six patients had cystic artery embolization performed immediately before yttrium-90 radioembolization, either by using Gelfoam pledgets (n = 35) or coils (n = 11). Clinical symptomatology during the admission and angiographic findings at 1-month follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Rates of collateralization or recanalization of the cystic artery were compared, as well as the frequency of postprocedural abdominal pain and need for cholecystectomy. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in all patients, and there were no procedural complications related to cystic artery embolization. Of the 11 coil-embolized patients, 5 (45%) demonstrated collateralization of the cystic artery at 1 month, and 1 (9%) demonstrated recanalization of the cystic artery. Of the 35 Gelfoam-embolized cases, 2 (6%) had collateralized at 1 month, and 14 (40%) had recanalized. Two patients (one from each group) had self-limited right upper quadrant pain after the procedure, and one patient in the coil embolization group required cholecystectomy. CONCLUSION: Proximal cystic artery embolization is safe and feasible and may be performed during liver-directed embolotherapy to minimize the exposure of the gallbladder to particulate, chemoembolic, or radioembolic agents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".