ArticleOncology letters2016
Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in early stage renal cell carcinoma.
Article in Oncology letters, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in early stage renal cell carcinoma. A total of 76 patients suffering from early stage renal cell carcinoma were selected and randomly assigned into the observation group (41 cases) or the control group (35 cases). Percutaneous RFA was used in the observation group, while retroperitoneoscopic radical operation of renal cell carcinoma was used in the control group, and the operative effects were compared. In the observation group, operation time, blood loss during operation, length of stay and incidence rate of complications were lower than those in control group (P<0.05). For both groups, serum C-reactive protein, interleukin-6 and T lymphocyte counts at 1, 2 and 3 days after operation were all increased; however, the control group had significantly greater increase for all the time points (P<0.05). For total effective rates, tumour-free survival times and survival rates, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P>0.05). Percutaneous RFA has a reduced size of operation wound and a quick postoperative recovery time in the treatment of early stage renal cell carcinoma. It results in less inflammation and immunity-based injuries in the body and achieves the same clinical outcomes as retroperitoneoscopic radical operation of renal cell carcinoma.
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.