Purpose <p>To review the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of bleomycin electrosclerotherapy (BEST) for slow-flow vascular malformations.</p> Materials and Methods <p>A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, with a protocol registered in PROSPERO. Five databases were searched, supplemented by citation tracking, to identify peer-reviewed studies reporting clinical outcomes of BEST for slow-flow vascular malformations. Single-patient case reports were excluded. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias.</p> Results <p>Ten studies were included, with a total of 401 patients and 416 lesions. Seven studies were retrospective, three were prospective, and one was comparative. Any symptom improvement was reported in 62–100% of patients; however, outcome definitions and assessment methods varied substantially across studies, limiting direct comparability. Any size reduction was reported in 83–100% of lesions, based on clinical and imaging-based assessments, including volumetry. Serious adverse events were uncommon, and no systemic toxicity was reported. All non-randomised studies had serious risk of bias.</p> Conclusion <p>BEST appears promising for selected slow-flow vascular malformations. However, evidence is limited by methodological heterogeneity and high risk of bias, and treatment decisions should remain individualised and based on multidisciplinary evaluation.</p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Effectiveness and Safety of Bleomycin Electrosclerotherapy for Slow-Flow Vascular Malformations: A Systematic Review

  • Johannes Gehr,
  • Louise Hindsø,
  • Mikkel Taudorf,
  • Jonas Peter Eiberg,
  • Susanne Christiansen Frevert,
  • Ruben Juhl Jensen,
  • Mikkel Kaltoft,
  • Lars Birger Lönn,
  • Louise Rosenørn de la Motte,
  • Michael Strøm,
  • Caroline Clausen

摘要

Purpose

To review the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of bleomycin electrosclerotherapy (BEST) for slow-flow vascular malformations.

Materials and Methods

A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, with a protocol registered in PROSPERO. Five databases were searched, supplemented by citation tracking, to identify peer-reviewed studies reporting clinical outcomes of BEST for slow-flow vascular malformations. Single-patient case reports were excluded. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

Results

Ten studies were included, with a total of 401 patients and 416 lesions. Seven studies were retrospective, three were prospective, and one was comparative. Any symptom improvement was reported in 62–100% of patients; however, outcome definitions and assessment methods varied substantially across studies, limiting direct comparability. Any size reduction was reported in 83–100% of lesions, based on clinical and imaging-based assessments, including volumetry. Serious adverse events were uncommon, and no systemic toxicity was reported. All non-randomised studies had serious risk of bias.

Conclusion

BEST appears promising for selected slow-flow vascular malformations. However, evidence is limited by methodological heterogeneity and high risk of bias, and treatment decisions should remain individualised and based on multidisciplinary evaluation.

Graphical Abstract