ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2017
Irreversible electroporation as treatment of locally advanced and as margin accentuation in borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- High-voltage electrical pulses for pancreatic cancer treatment in the era of precision medicine.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Review
- Use of Irreversible Electroporation in Pancreatic Cancer Patients: A Multi-Center Experience.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Postoperative Refractory Diarrhea After Margin Accentuation of the Superior Mesenteric Artery with Irreversible Electroporation in Pancreaticoduodenectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Irreversible Electroporation Margin Accentuation in Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Irreversible electroporation for the management of pancreatic cancer: Current data and future directions.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Benefitial role of electrochemotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer - radiological perspective.Polish journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Treatment optimization of locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer (Review).International journal of oncology · 2021Review
- Margin Accentuation Irreversible Electroporation in Stage III Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2021Review
- Local ablation of pancreatic tumors: State of the art and future perspectives.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Current Clinical Outcomes, Mechanism of Action and Opportunities for Synergistic Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Systematic Review of Irreversible Electroporation Role in Management of Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.Cancers · 2019Review
- US-guided percutaneous laser ablation of refractory metastatic retroperitoneal lesions: A care-compliant case report.Medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, many local ablation technologies based on thermal damage have been used in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC) and borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma (BLRPC). However, they are associated with major complications because of possible vascular and ductal damage. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a nonthermal ablation technology that seems safe near vital vascular and ductal structures. IRE could be used as exclusive treatment of LAPC (en situ to IRE) after induction chemotherapy In BLRPC, surgery is not really radical in 6% of patients (microscopic residual) and local recurrences occur in 11-42% of apparent radical resections. IRE could be used as margin accentuation to increase posterior margin during radical surgery in BLRPC. Our outcomes are safety, time to progression. Secondary outcomes are overall survival, pain control and quality of life. We are performing a prospective evaluation of patients undergoing IRE for LAPC or BLRPC since July 2014. We have included patients with non-metastatic LAPC with maximum size ≤4 cm (en situ to IRE) and patients with BLRPC (complementary IRE). We have performed induction chemotherapy in both groups. After treatment, patients were evaluated on days 1, 2, 4, 7, 14, 21, 30, 60 and 90 with amylase and lipase serum and abdominal drainage test. Based on Ethics Committee's request, follow-up imaging was performed at the 10th day for safety evaluation, at 30, 60 and 90 days for response evaluation and then every 3 months. Seven patients (two women and five men) underwent IRE. Two patients had LAPC and received en situ to IRE. In five patients affected by BLRPC we performed IRE and pancreatic head resection. In all patients, intraoperative imaging confirmed that the treatment of the whole tumor volume was complete. All seven patients demonstrated nonclinically relevant elevation of their amylase and lipase, which returned normal at 5 days postprocedure. No patient showed evidence of clinical pancreatitis or fistula. No major complications were recorded. Patients with LAPC died of distant metastases 6 month after treatment. At 3- and 6-month follow-up, all patients with BLPRC were alive and disease free. Only one patient has already reached 9-month follow-up and is alive and disease free. Our results are only preliminary. However, IRE ablation of LAPC and BLRPC seems a safe and feasible treatment.
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.