Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparisons of clinical outcomes between proximal vs distal and combined embolization in 1st and 2nd study sets

From: The impacts of different embolization techniques on splenic artery embolization for blunt splenic injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Outcome Study set Location Percentage (%) P value OR (95% CI)
Success rate 1st P vs D 91.4 (444/486) vs 87.7 (213/243) 0.11a 1.49 (0.91–2.45)
P vs P + D 91.4 (444/486) vs 86.4 (38/44) 0.27a 1.67 (0.67–4.18)
2nd P vs D 85.0 (122/142) vs 82.3 (108/131) 0.52a 1.28 (0.61–2.67)
P vs P + D 86.7 (104/120) vs 72.2 (13/18) 0.11a 2.56 (0.81–8.05)
Severe complication 1st P vs D 10.7 (50/466) vs 30.7 (67/218) <0.01a 0.27 (0.18–0.41)
P vs P + D 10.7 (50/466) vs 35.6 (16/45) <0.01a 0.22 (0.11–0.43)
2nd P vs D 18.2 (24/132) vs 28.7 (31/108) 0.05 0.51 (0.26–1.00)
P vs P + D 20.2 (23/114) vs 58.8 (10/17) 0.00 0.10 (0.03–0.36)
DC III 1st P vs D 7.3 (32/438) vs 13.0 (28/216) 0.02a 0.53 (0.31–0.90)
P vs P + D 7.3 (32/438) vs 10.3 (4/39) 0.52b 0.69 (0.23–2.06)
2nd P vs D 9.9 (13/131) vs 20.0 (21/105) 0.07 0.49 (0.22–1.06)
P vs P + D 10.8 (10/93) vs 23.1 (3/13) 0.16 0.37 (0.09–1.50)
  1. P: Proximal splenic artery embolization; D: Distal splenic artery embolization; P + D: Combination of proximal and distal splenic artery embolization; DC III: Clavien-Dindo classification of morbidity for complication III
  2. aChi-square
  3. bFisher’s test