Out of a record-breaking number of submissions, the CIRSE 2025 Scientific Programme committee selected two winning posters: Kimi Dai and Dr. Teik Choon See’s “A review of clinical management on cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis (PVT)” and Dr. Maciej Szmygin et al.’s “Endovascular stenting as a safe and effective therapeutic approach for patients with extracranial arterial dissections – a single center experience.”
Mr. Dai, can you tell us a little bit about your academic background?
Dai: I am a PhD candidate in the Department of Radiology at the University of Cambridge. My research focuses on the aetiology, diagnosis, and treatment of portal vein thrombosis (PVT). My research methods include three workstreams: aetiology (genetic and acquired prothrombotic factors and local precipitants), diagnosis (standardised imaging criteria and classification of recent versus chronic PVT across ultrasound, CT, and MRI), and treatment (comparative outcomes of anticoagulation, thrombolysis, and TIPS). I use structured evidence synthesis and observational analyses and work closely with interventional radiology, hepatology, and transplant teams to ensure clinical significance.
Your study focused on the clinical management of cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis (PVT). What motivated you to choose this research topic?
Dai: PVT in cirrhosis sits at a challenging interface between thrombosis and portal hypertension. Practice can vary widely, which risks inconsistent care. I wanted to clarify who benefits from which treatment, aligning decisions with chronicity and extent of thrombus, portal hypertension profile, bleeding risk, and transplant considerations, so that the guidance is applicable in day‑to‑day practice.
What was it like to collaborate with Dr. Teik Choon See? How did you decide to work together on this project?
Dai: Dr. See is an interventional radiologist and my supervisor. He guided the research direction and adjusted my personal plan based on my progress. He not only addressed my questions but also taught me how to approach and solve them, which has shaped my method of working. Our collaboration has grown through sharing perspectives and refining a clinically focused framework.
Why did you decide to present your findings at CIRSE 2025?
Dai: CIRSE is a leading congress in interventional radiology. It brings together the clinicians who can act on these findings and provides the right forum for procedural innovation and for careful discussion about when to escalate from anticoagulation to TIPS in PVT, so the work can be translated into routine practice by the specialists delivering these procedures.
How would you describe the submission experience?
Dai: Straightforward. CIRSE offers a range of abstract categories, which made it easy to select the most appropriate track for this project. I then prepared the poster using the clear technical instructions, which allowed me to focus more on the content.
Your poster was awarded magna cum laude – what do you think made it stand out?
Dai: I think our poster has strong clinical relevance. We sorted out a concise, day‑to‑day pathway for managing PVT in cirrhosis, considering recent versus chronic thrombosis and the presence of portal hypertension complications. Our poster also emphasised the significance of TIPS with evidence. We highlighted the role of TIPS when anticoagulation is insufficient or complications persist, and we included supporting images on the poster that show restoration of portal flow and reduced rebleeding risk in appropriate cases.
What did your research find about the impact of TIPS treatment options on PVT?
Dai: In carefully selected cirrhotic patients, TIPS provides reliable portal decompression and can help restore portal flow when anticoagulation alone is not enough, particularly in the setting of variceal haemorrhage or refractory ascites. The main trade‑off is hepatic encephalopathy, so decisions are individualised with multidisciplinary consideration. In addition, in selected acute or subacute cases with substantial thrombus burden, combining TIPS with catheter‑directed thrombolysis can accelerate clot clearance and increase the likelihood of recanalisation. Our poster included imaging and outcome evidence that supports these practical points and helps clinicians recognise when TIPS is most likely to benefit patients.
What impact do hope your results will have on patient care?
Dai: I hope the work leads to faster, safer, and more consistent decisions. In practice, that means earlier anticoagulation for recent, clinically significant PVT with planned re‑imaging to assess response, clear escalation criteria for TIPS when thrombosis progresses or portal‑hypertension complications persist despite best medical and endoscopic care, and fewer unnecessary interventions and delays for transplant candidates by restoring portal flow when feasible.
What are your future research plans?
Dai: I plan to complete a systematic review of non‑cirrhotic PVT to define prognostic factors and treatment effects distinct from cirrhosis. I will also build a risk stratification model to predict recanalisation, recurrence, and bleeding risk, supporting individualised choices. Finally, I aim to initiate a multicentre registry to validate the pathway prospectively and to evaluate real‑world outcomes of anticoagulation and TIPS in different subgroups.
Dr. Szmygin, your research topic was on extracranial artery dissection (EAD) – a rare occurrence in the general population. What led you to study endovascular stenting in patients with EAD?
Szmygin: Although dissection of the extracranial segments of arteries is relatively rare overall, it is not an uncommon cause of cerebral ischemia in the younger population. In our daily clinical practice, we often encounter otherwise healthy patients in their 40s and 50s who experience EAD during physical activity or even minor trauma. Suddenly, these individuals develop neurological deficits and face uncertainty about their prognosis. Fortunately, in the majority of cases, medical management is sufficient and leads to complete recovery. However, up to 20% of patients do not respond adequately to conservative treatment and show disease progression. In such cases, our experience with endovascular stenting has been very promising, helping patients regain their previous level of activity and quality of life. During our research on this topic, we found that there is no clear consensus on the indications for stenting in EAD. This lack of standardization remains a subject of ongoing debate and has motivated us to further explore this area and present our findings in the current study.
You’re a specialist in interventional neuroradiology working at the Medical University of Lublin in Poland. How many EAD cases have you encountered during your time there?
Szmygin: As previously mentioned, EAD is a relatively rare condition, and only a limited number of patients require endovascular intervention each year. Over the course of my career in our Interventional Radiology Department, I have personally encountered approximately 30 such cases.
Your research conclusions noted the importance of multidisciplinary cooperation for optimal patient care. How is your IR department cooperating with other departments at your hospital?
Szmygin: Our department has a history spanning over 50 years and, during this time, it has developed strong collaborative relationships with nearly every department in our hospital. We have established particularly effective cooperation with the neurosurgery and neurology departments, regularly performing neurointerventions, including mechanical thrombectomies. Of course, there are still areas where collaboration can be strengthened. Surgery, endocrinology, and orthopedics are examples of departments where we see potential for deeper integration and cooperation. I believe that multidisciplinary events such as CIRSE and ECIO offer valuable opportunities to introduce specialists from other fields to the capabilities and benefits of interventional radiology.
Why did you decide to present your findings at CIRSE 2025?
Szmygin: I was fortunate to attend my first CIRSE congress in Barcelona in 2019, and it had a significant impact on the early stages of my scientific and clinical career. Since then, I have made it a priority to attend and actively participate in every congress, as I believe CIRSE provides the best platform for sharing experiences, learning from peers, and advancing the field of interventional radiology. For this reason, I did not consider any other congress for presenting my findings on EAD.
Your poster was awarded magna cum laude – what do you think made it stand out?
Szmygin: I believe that the clinical implications and the clear evidence demonstrating that endovascular stenting is a safe and effective treatment option for properly selected EAD patients are the key strengths of this poster. That said, considering the exceptionally high standards of accepted posters at this year’s CIRSE, I must admit I was (very positively) surprised that my work was selected for an award. It is an incredible honour and a strong motivation to continue contributing to the field of interventional radiology.
What are your future research plans?
Szmygin: My future research plans revolve around interventional neuroradiology, especially ischemic stroke therapy, and orthopaedic embolizations – I try to investigate the role of genicular artery embolization on immunological response. I hope to share my results during next year’s CIRSE congress.
