Table 2.
Ref., yr | Clinical success (%) | Re-bleeding rate (%) | Need for surgery (%) | Complication rate (%) | 30-d mortality (%) |
Lang et al[23], 1992 | 86 | 56 | 2 | 16 | 4 |
Toyoda et al[33], 1995 | 91 | 18 | 18 | 0 | 27 |
Toyoda et al[37], 1996 | 80 | 23 | 13 | NA | 23 |
Walsh et al[43], 1999 | 52 | 52 | 37 | 4 | 40 |
De Wispelaere et al[40], 2002 | 64 | 36 | 21 | 0 | 46 |
Ljungdahl et al[19], 2002 | 67 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 6 |
Ripoll et al[24], 2004 | 71 | 29 | 16 | 0 | 26 |
Holme et al[25], 2006 | 65 | 28 | 35 | 0 | 25 |
Eriksson et al[20], 2006 | 80 | 0 | 20 | NA | NA |
Loffroy et al[13], 2008 | 94 | 17 | 14 | 6 | 21 |
Larssen et al[15], 2008 | 72 | 9 | 30 | 8 | 17 |
van Vugt et al[35], 2009 | 81 | 19 | 12 | NA | 38 |
Loffroy et al[26], 2009 | 72 | 28 | 12 | 10 | 27 |
All studies | 75 | 25 | 18 | 4 | 25 |
The table shows the rates of clinical success, recurrent bleeding after technically successful embolization, need for surgery to control the bleeding, complications, and peri-procedural mortality.