ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2016
Computed Tomography and Ultrasounds for the Follow-up of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Ablation: What You Need to Know.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Physiological Motion Reduction Using Lagrangian Tracking for Electrode Displacement Elastography.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Image-guided tumor ablation provides curative treatment in properly selected patients or appropriate therapeutic options whenever surgical techniques are precluded. Tumor response assessment post ablation is important in determining treatment success and future therapy. Accurate interpretation of post-ablation imaging findings is crucial for therapeutic and follow-up strategies. Computed Tomography (CT) and Ultrasound (US) play important roles in patients' follow-up post liver thermal ablation therapies. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) can provide valuable information on the ablation effects faster and at a lower cost than computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. However, a disadvantage is that the technique cannot examine total liver parenchyma for disease progression as CT and Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging can. Follow-up strategies for assessment of tumor response includes contrast enhanced multiphasic (non-contrast, arterial, portal, delayed phases) imaging with Computed Tomography at three, six, and 12 months post ablation session and annually ever since in order to prove sustained effectiveness of the ablation or detect progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.