Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25149298›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2015

Image-guided microwave thermoablation of hepatic tumours using novel robotic guidance: an early experience.

Emmanuel C Mbalisike, Thomas J Vogl, Stefan Zangos, Katrin Eichler, Prakash Balakrishnan, Jijo Paul

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Robotic navigation-assisted percutaneous liver puncture: a pilot study.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Robotic Assistance in Percutaneous Liver Ablation Therapies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Accuracy of Electrode Placement in IRE Treatment with Navigated Guidance.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2021
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Emmanuel C MbalisikeInstitute for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Klinikum Bad Salzungen, Lindigalle 3, 36433, Bad Salzungen, Germany, embalisike@yahoo.com.
Thomas J Vogl
Stefan Zangos
Katrin Eichler
Prakash Balakrishnan
Jijo Paul

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate and compare novel robotic guidance and manual approaches based on procedural accuracy, procedural time, procedural performance, image quality as well as patient dose during image-guided microwave thermoablation.

methodThe study was prospectively performed between June 2013 and December 2013 using 70 patients. Forty randomly selected patients (group 1) were treated with manual guidance and 30 patients (group 2) were treated using a novel robotic guidance. Parameters evaluated were procedural accuracy, total procedural time, procedural performance, quantitative/qualitative image quality and patient dose. Two-sided Student's t test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to test the significance of the data and p values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

resultAccuracy parameters were significantly higher in group 2 (all p < 0.05). Total procedural time showed a mean time difference of 3 min (group 2 > group 1; p = 0.0008). Volume CT dose index and dose-length product were significantly lower for group 2 compared to group 1 (all p < 0.05) for CT fluoroscopy imaging. Total procedural performance score was higher for group 2 compared to group 1 (p = 0.0001). Image quality parameters were insignificant between examined groups.

conclusionThe novel robotic guided approach improved the accuracy of targeting the target tumour, reduced patient dose and increased procedural performance (which influences the procedural safety) during ablation. KEY POINTS: • Few reports are available in the literature regarding robotic-assisted liver microwave ablation. • The robotic guided approach improved accuracy of localizing the target tumour. • Radiation dose on patients was reduced with the robotic guidance. • Numbers of insertions and readjustments were reduced, lowering chances of complications.

Indexed as

RoboticsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCone-Beam Computed TomographyDiathermyFemaleFluoroscopyFollow-Up StudiesHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMicrowavesMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.