Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27026913›Full record

ArticleSpringerPlus2016

Comparison of ablation defect on MR imaging with computer simulation estimated treatment zone following irreversible electroporation of patient prostate.

Govindarajan Srimathveeravalli, Francois Cornelis, Joseph Mashni, Haruyuki Takaki, Jeremy C Durack, Stephen B Solomon, Jonathan A Coleman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SpringerPlus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

7 authors.

Govindarajan SrimathveeravalliInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA.
Francois CornelisInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA ; Department of Radiology, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076 Bordeaux, France.
Joseph MashniUrology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA.
Haruyuki TakakiInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA.
Jeremy C DurackInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA.
Stephen B SolomonInterventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA.
Jonathan A ColemanUrology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065 USA.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Irreversible Electroporation Ablation for Colorectal Metastases to the LungR21CA159559 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INST CAN RESEARCH · PI SOLOMON, STEPHEN BARNETT · 2012 to 2015
$477k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R21 CA159559
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To determine whether patient specific numerical simulations of irreversible electroporation (IRE) of the prostate correlates with the treatment effect seen on follow-up MR imaging. Computer models were created using intra-operative US images, post-treatment follow-up MR images and clinical data from six patients receiving IRE. Isoelectric contours drawn using simulation results were compared with MR imaging to estimate the energy threshold separating treated and untreated tissue. Simulation estimates of injury to the neurovascular bundle and rectum were compared with clinical follow-up and patient reported outcomes. At the electric field strength of 700 V/cm, simulation estimated electric field distribution was not different from the ablation defect seen on follow-up MR imaging (p = 0.43). Simulation predicted cross sectional area of treatment (mean 532.33 ± 142.32 mm(2)) corresponded well with the treatment zone seen on MR imaging (mean 540.16 ± 237.13 mm(2)). Simulation results did not suggest injury to the rectum or neurovascular bundle, matching clinical follow-up at 3 months. Computer simulation estimated zone of irreversible electroporation in the prostate at 700 V/cm was comparable to measurements made on follow-up MR imaging. Numerical simulation may aid treatment planning for irreversible electroporation of the prostate in patients.

Indexed as

AblationComputer simulationIrreversible electroporationProstate

Identifiers

PMID27026913
PMCPMC4771651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.