MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413020271 · doi:10.1016/j.eprac.2025.07.024

Thyroid Arterial Embolization for the Management of Benign and Malignant Thyroid Disease: A Systematic Review

2025· review· en· W4413020271 on OpenAlex
Hannelore I. Coerts, Brooke D’Mello, Frederik A. Verburg, Jesse D. Pasternak, Menno R. Vriens, Pieter‐Jan van Doormaal, Tessa M. van Ginhoven

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEndocrine Practice · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThyroidThyroid diseaseRadiologyEmbolizationThyroid nodulesArterial EmbolizationDiseasePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Thyroid arterial embolization (TAE) is a minimally invasive procedure that reduces blood flow to the thyroid gland by injecting particles into the superior and/or inferior thyroid artery. It has been sporadically used for goiter, Graves' disease, thyrotoxicosis, and thyroid cancers, but no reviews have assessed its safety and efficacy. METHODS: Databases were searched until January 2024. English-language studies on TAE were included. Studies using TAE for arterial aneurysms or lacking full text were excluded. No meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Among 1203 retrieved articles, 24 studies met inclusion criteria: TAE was used for goiter (8 studies), Graves' disease (8), thyroid malignancy (5), and thyrotoxicosis (4). The primary outcome was safety and efficacy. Limited evidence suggested benefits, including goiter size reduction and symptom relief with minimal complications like neck pain and hematoma. In Graves' disease, TAE induced hormonal and immunologic changes, normalizing thyroid function in some patients. In thyroid cancer, it alleviated symptoms and facilitated safer surgery. However, serious risks, including nontarget embolization and mortality, require caution. CONCLUSION: This review presents an overview of the literature regarding safety and efficacy of TAE. The lack of robust data, significant risk of serious complications (including nontarget embolization and mortality), and absence of a standardized, safe protocol preclude recommending TAE as a routine treatment option. Given the high efficacy and lower complication rates of current established therapies, TAE should only be considered in exceptional circumstances, when standard treatments have failed or are contraindicated, and then only at specialized centers with extensive embolization expertise.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it