Transarterial Embolization for the Treatment of Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review of Indications, Safety, and Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter arterial "embolization" (TAE) in the treatment of chronic "musculoskeletal pain" refractory to standard therapy. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for original research articles evaluating TAE in patients with musculoskeletal conditions from database inception to January 21, 2020. Search terms employed were as follows: "embolization", "pain", "knee osteoarthritis", joint replacement, epicondylitis, tenderness, inflammation, WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), microspheres, Embozene, geniculate artery, neovascularity, transcatheter, embolic, imipenem/cilastatin sodium, angiogenesis, and "musculoskeletal". Studies involving particle "embolization" for painful musculoskeletal conditions were included. Studies of TAE for hemarthrosis or malignancy-related "musculoskeletal pain" were excluded. RESULTS: The primary search yielded 1,099 sources; 7 articles and 4 abstracts were included for data extraction. All were cohorts or case series, with low risk of bias and moderate to poor level of evidence. Heterogeneity between studies was high, precluding meta-analysis. The reviewed studies reported the safety and efficacy of TAE for the treatment of "knee osteoarthritis"; adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder; tendinopathy/enthesopathy of the knee, shoulder, elbow, and ankle; and cervical myalgia. All TAEs were reported as technically successful without major complications or subsequent serious adverse events, including no reported osteonecrosis, cutaneous ulceration, limb ischemia, cartilage degeneration, or myotendinous injury. TAE significantly reduced pain and improved function for all of the treated conditions, with durable response up to 24 months post procedure. CONCLUSION: TAE appears to be a safe and effective treatment for some types of chronic refractory "musculoskeletal pain". Randomized placebo-controlled studies are necessary to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.009 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".