ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of empiric embolization for postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH) with negative angiographic signs of active bleeding. Materials and methodsA total of 100 patients (76 men, 24 women) who were diagnosed with PPH with angiographic findings revealing no signs of active bleeding from December 2013 to December 2019 were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether the procedures were performed with or without empiric embolization in angiography (group of empiric embolization, N=47; group of no embolization, N=53). Data reflecting patients' characteristics, hemorrhagic details, classification of PPH grade, and postoperative complications were acquired. The rates of clinical success in hemostasis and mortality were compared between the group of empiric embolization and the group of no embolization. ResultsIn the group of empiric embolization, the rate of clinical success in hemostasis and mortality were 61.7% and 27.7%, respectively. In the group of no embolization, the rates of clinical success in hemostasis and mortality were 39.6% and 13.2%, respectively. The rate of clinical success in hemostasis in the group of empiric embolization was significantly higher than that in the group of no embolization (p = 0.028). There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the different groups (p = 0.071). ConclusionThe clinical success rate of hemostasis in patients with empiric embolization is higher than that in patients with no embolization. Empiric embolization may be an efficacious hemostatic treatment for PPH with angiographic findings revealing no signs of active bleeding.