Background and Objectives: Roughly 10% of cancer patients experience an episode of bleeding. The bleeding severity can range from occasional trivial bleeds to major bleeding. The treatment for the bleeding may vary, depending on the clinical condition and anatomical site, and may include various strategies, among which TAE is a cornerstone of major bleeding management. However, the existing literature on tumor hemorrhages is inconsistent. The objective of this multicenter retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of arterial embolization in the treatment of tumor hemorrhages in patients with solid cancers. Materials and Methods: The data for patients with solid cancers undergoing TAE for the management of tumor hemorrhages from January 2020 to May 2023 were gathered. Results: A total of 92 patients with cancer-related bleeding were treated between January 2020 and May 2023. No bleeding was detected by X-ray angiography (XA) in 12 (13%) cases; therefore, a blind embolization was performed. The most common bleeding site was the liver (21.7%). A total of 66 tumor hemorrhages were spontaneous. The most commonly used embolic agent was polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) particles (30.4%). Technical success was achieved in 82 (89.1%) cases, with an 84.8% clinical success rate related to 14 cases of rebleeding. Proximal embolization was performed for 19 (20.7%) patients. Complications were recorded for 10 (10.9%) patients. The 30-day bleeding-related mortality was 15.2%. The technical success, clinical success, proximal embolization rate, and 30-day rebleeding were worse in the subset of patients undergoing TAE with coils. Conclusions: Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) represents a viable and potentially life-saving therapeutic approach in the management of tumor hemorrhages, demonstrating a notable effectiveness and safety. The TAE of bleeding tumors using coils resulted in a higher rate of non-superselective proximal embolization, with a trend toward lower clinical success rates and higher rebleeding episodes.

Errors in emergency ultrasound (US) have been representing an increasing problem in recent years thanks to several unique features related to both the inherent characteristics of the discipline and to the latest developments, which every medical operator should be aware of. Because of the subjective nature of the interpretation of emergency US findings, it is more prone to errors than other diagnostic imaging modalities. The misinterpretation of US images should therefore be considered as a serious risk in diagnosis. The etiology of error is multi-factorial: it depends on environmental factors, patients and the technical skills of the operator; it is influenced by intrinsic US artifacts, poor clinical correlation, US-setting errors and anatomical variants; and it is conditioned by the lack of a methodologically correct clinical approach and excessive diagnostic confidence too. In this review, we evaluate the common and uncommon sources of diagnostic errors in emergency US during clinical practice, showing how to recognize and avoid them.

Background: The utilization of inflammation-based scores, such as the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio (LMR), and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR), has garnered attention for their potential as prognostic indicators in various cancers. However, their predictive role in patients with intermediate-stage HCC undergoing transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) remains an area that requires further investigation, as early recognition of TACE refractoriness holds the potential to guide tailored therapeutic interventions. Methods: This multicenter international retrospective study analyzed data from patients with intermediate-stage HCC undergoing TACE between 2018 and 2024. Inflammation-based scores (NLR, LMR, PLR) were assessed preoperatively to predict treatment outcomes. Results: Two hundred and fourteen patients were enrolled. Preoperative LMR showed the largest area under the curve for the prediction of 6-months PFS, based on the ROC curve analysis. Both high LMR (≥2.24) and low NLR (<4.72) were associated with improved objective response rates and 6-month progression-free survival. Lymphocyte count emerged as a strong predictor of treatment response in both simple (p < 0.001) and multiple (p < 0.001) logistic regression analyses. Conclusions: This study highlights the prognostic value of inflammation-based scores, particularly LMR and NLR, in predicting the treatment response and short-term outcomes of patients with intermediate-stage HCC undergoing TACE. Future investigations should focus on validating these scores’ clinical applicability and assessing their impact on long-term patient survival and therapeutic decision-making.

Background: Endovascular intervention is now the primary line of therapy for arterial injury brought on by pelvic trauma since it can significantly reduce considerable morbidity associated with surgery and can swiftly access and control bleeding sites. Despite international guidelines and widespread awareness of the role of angioembolization in clinical practice, robust evidence comparing the outcomes of angioembolization in hemodynamically stable and unstable patients is still lacking. This study aims to directly compare the outcomes of angioembolization for the treatment of pelvic traumatic arterial injury in patients with hemodynamic stability vs. hemodynamic instability. Methods: In our multicenter retrospective investigation, we analyzed data from consecutive patients who underwent, from January 2020 to May 2023, angioembolization for traumatic pelvic arterial injury. Results: In total, 116 angioembolizations were performed. Gelatin sponges (56.9%) and coils (25.9%) were the most widely used embolic agents. The technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 91.4%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of technical success, clinical success, procedure-related complication rate, or 30-day bleeding-related mortality. Conclusions: Angioembolization is an effective and safe option for the management of traumatic pelvic arterial lesions even in hemodynamically unstable patients, despite technical variations such as greater use of prophylactic angioembolization.

Background and Objectives: Increasing attention is being paid to the coagulation disorders associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Bleeding accounts for 3–6% of COVID-19 patient deaths, and is often a forgotten part of the disease. The bleeding risk is enhanced by several factors, including spontaneous heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, the hyperfibrinolytic state, the consumption of coagulation factors, and thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulants. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of TAE in the management of bleeding in COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective study analyzes data from COVID-19 patients subjected to transcatheter arterial embolization for the management of bleeding from February 2020 to January 2023. Results: Transcatheter arterial embolization was performed in 73 COVID-19 patients for acute non-neurovascular bleeding during the study interval (February 2020–January 2023). Coagulopathy was observed in forty-four (60.3%) patients. The primary cause of bleeding was spontaneous soft tissue hematoma (63%). A 100% technical success rate was recorded; six cases of rebleeding resulted in a 91.8% clinical success rate. No cases of non-target embolization were observed. Complications were recorded in 13 (17.8%) patients. The efficacy and safety endpoints did not differ significantly between the coagulopathy and non-coagulopathy groups. Conclusions: Transcatheter Arterial Embolization (TAE) is an effective, safe and potentially life-saving option for the management of acute non-neurovascular bleeding in COVID-19 patients. This approach is effective and safe even in the subgroup of COVID-19 patients with coagulopathy.