Short-term clinical outcomes of transarterial embolization for symptomatic hand osteoarthritis refractory to conservative treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aims to assess the short-term clinical outcomes and safety of transarterial embolization (TAE) for symptomatic hand osteoarthritis (OA) refractory to conservative treatment. METHODSThe present retrospective cohort pilot study included nine patients who underwent TAE for symptomatic OA-associated hand pain in a single tertiary center between November 2022 and January 2023.The baseline and post-procedural OA-associated hand pain and function were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Australian Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index (AUS-CAN).The use of conservative treatment and pain medications was also recorded.Post-procedural adverse events were evaluated according to the Society of Interventional Radiology classification. RESULTSCompared with the baseline, the overall VAS scores were significantly decreased at 1-week, 1-month, 3-months, and 6-months after TAE (76 ± 15 mm versus 34 ± 18 mm, P < 0.001; 32 ± 11 mm, P < 0.001; 21 ± 15 mm, P < 0.001; 18 ± 19 mm, P = 0.002).Similarly, improvement in the mean total AUSCAN scores (22.0 ± 10.0 versus 13.2 ± 6.6, P = 0.007; 14.11 ± 7.3, P = 0.004; 9.8 ± 6.8, P = 0.004; 9.3 ± 7.4, P = 0.011) were documented.The use of other conservative treatment methods also gradually decreased.There were no severe adverse events reported during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONTAE is a feasible and safe treatment method for symptomatic hand OA refractory to conservative treatment.This minimally invasive procedure effectively relieves debilitating OA-associated joint pain and restores hand function with a durable treatment effect.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".