% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Tefera:299546,
      author       = {J. Tefera and T. N. Kuhn$^*$ and N. J. Matuschewski and E.
                      Meister and J. Nguyenová and T. Kao and M. Mutonga and R.
                      Bitar and V. Kahl and X. Zhang and A. Shewarega and J.
                      Chapiro and D. C. Madoff},
      title        = {{P}ortal and {H}epatic {V}ein {E}mbolization vs {P}ortal
                      {V}enous {E}mbolization {A}lone in {C}irrhotic and
                      {N}on-cirrhotic {S}wine: {A} {P}ilot {S}tudy.},
      journal      = {Journal of vascular and interventional radiology},
      volume       = {36},
      number       = {6},
      issn         = {1051-0443},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier},
      reportid     = {DKFZ-2025-00490},
      pages        = {1042-1050.e2},
      year         = {2025},
      note         = {Volume 36, Issue 6, June 2025, Pages 1042-1050.e2},
      abstract     = {To evaluate the effectiveness of PVE and HVE compared to
                      PVE in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic swine.Sixteen Yorkshire
                      pigs were included in this study. In the cirrhotic group (n
                      = 8) and non-cirrhotic group (n = 8), subjects underwent
                      embolization according to established protocols. CT scans
                      were acquired before and at two- and four-week intervals
                      following the embolization. Liver volumes were segmented in
                      the portal venous phase. Student's t-test with a
                      significance level at p<0.05 was used.Across all swine, the
                      FLR was significantly larger after PVE + HVE to PVE at two
                      weeks $(24.12\%$ $[95\%$ CI: $15.36\%,$ $32.88\%]$ vs.
                      $12.75\%$ $[95\%$ CI: $7.43\%,$ $18.07\%],$ p = 0.021) and
                      four weeks $(23.23\%$ $[95\%$ CI: $15.79\%,$ $33.47\%]$ vs.
                      $15.08\%$ $[95\%$ CI: $9.98\%,$ $20.87\%],$ p = 0.043)
                      post-embolization. In the cirrhotic group, the FLR increase
                      was greater following PVE + HVE compared to PVE at two weeks
                      $(20.85\%$ $[95\%$ CI: $14.40\%,$ $27.30\%]$ vs. $8.66\%$
                      $[95\%$ CI: $6.47\%,$ $10.86\%],$ p = 0.0089) and four weeks
                      $(19.27\%$ $[95\%$ CI: $17.87\%,$ $20.67\%]$ vs. $13.33\%$
                      $[95\%$ CI: $9.23\%,$ $13.33\%],$ p = 0.0003)
                      post-embolization.PVE + HVE resulted in greater FLR
                      hypertrophy than PVE alone indicating that cirrhotic livers
                      may benefit from the addition of HVE.},
      cin          = {D170},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-He78)D170-20160331},
      pnm          = {314 - Immunologie und Krebs (POF4-314)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-314},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:40043833},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.jvir.2025.02.028},
      url          = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/299546},
}