Table 1. Advantages, disadvantages, and cost of main microparticle components.
| Advantages | Disadvantages | Cost | Market examples | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Permanent particles | ||||
| Polyvinyl alcohol | Dry form can be mixed with 100% contrast. Less embolic needed. Inexpensive. | Size variability could impact the level of vessel occlusion, microcatheter occlusion, or particle aggregation. | $ | Contour 1 , Bearing 2 , Beadblock 1 |
| Trisacryl with gelatin | Ease of injection. Reduced aggregation. More predictable level of occlusion. Less clogging of microcatheters | Need intermittent stirring to prevent sedimentation. Porcine gelatin allergic potential. | $$ | Embosphere 2 , EmboGold 2 |
| Polyethylene glycol | Greater compressibility for more distal occlusion. Tightly calibrated size distribution | Risk of clogging microcatheter with larger size | $$ | HydroPearl 3 |
| Resorbable particles | ||||
| Gelatin sponge | Complete resorption of embolic while maintaining vessel integrity. | Inflammation that leads to long-term occlusion of target vessels. | $ | Gelfoam 4 , Torpedo Gelatin Foam 2 , Embocube 2 |
| Drug-eluting particles | ||||
| Sulfonate-modified acrylamido-polyvinyl alcohol hydrogel | Compatible with chemotherapy (Doxorubicin, Irinotecan). Real-time feedback both during and after embolization. | Shorter suspension time due to increased density and stiffness. Potential for microcatheter blockage | $$$ | DC Bead 1 |
| Sodium acrylate alcohol copolymer | Expand four times original size | Prone to fragmentation after drug-loading | $$ | Quadrasphere 2 |
| Hydrogel core with Polyzene-F coating | Precise calibration of particles and narrow size distributions allows for deeper penetration | Variable deformation may result in more distal embolization | $$ | Embozene 5 , Oncozene 5 |
**Manufacturer details:
1
Boston Scientific; Washington, D.C., US
2
MeritMedical; Utah, US
3
Terumo Interventional Systems; California, US
4
Pfizer: New York; US
5
Varian; California, US