Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28470395›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2017

Irreversible Electroporation to Treat Malignant Tumor Recurrences Within the Pelvic Cavity: A Case Series.

L G P H Vroomen, H J Scheffer, M C A M Melenhorst, N van Grieken, M P van den Tol, M R Meijerink

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07782164 (Irreversible Electroporation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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.

NCT07782164 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) of Recurrent Pelvic Tumors: the PELFIRE Study.

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorAmsterdam UMC, location VUmcRan2025 to 2028Enrolled27ConditionsColorectal Carcinoma, Renal Cancer, Bladder Cancer, Cervical CancerArmsIrreversible electroporation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

L G P H VroomenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. la.vroomen@vumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0932-092X
H J SchefferDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M C A M MelenhorstDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
N van GriekenDepartment of Pathology, VU University Medical Center, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M P van den TolDepartment of Surgical Oncology, VU University Medical Center, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
M R MeijerinkDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, de Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the initial experience with irreversible electroporation (IRE) to treat pelvic tumor recurrences.

methodsA retrospective single-center analysis was performed. Adverse events were recorded using Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (CTCAE) 4.0. Clinical outcome was determined using pain- and general- symptom assessment, including Seddon's peripheral nerve injury (PNI) types. Radiological outcome was evaluated by comparing baseline with three-month 18F-FDG PET-CT follow-up.

resultsEight patients (nine tumors [recurrences of primary rectal (n = 4), anal (n = 1), sigmoid (n = 1), cervical (n = 1), and renal cell carcinoma (n = 1)]) underwent percutaneous IRE as salvage therapy. Median longest tumor diameter was 3.7 cm (range 1.2-7.0). One CTCAE grade III adverse event (hemorrhage) and eight CTCAE grade II complications occurred in 6/8 patients: vagino-tumoral fistula (n = 1), lower limb motor loss (n = 3; PNI type II) with partial recovery in one patient, hypotonic bladder (n = 2; PNI types I and II) with complete recovery in one patient, and upper limb motor loss (n = 2; PNI type II) with partial recovery in both patients. No residual tumor tissue was observed at 3-month follow-up. After a median follow-up of 12 months, local progression was observed in 5/9 lesions (4/5 were >3 cm pre-IRE); one lesion was successfully retreated. Debilitating preprocedural pain (n = 3) remained unchanged (n = 1) or improved (n = 2).

conclusionIRE may represent a suitable technique to treat pelvic tumor recurrences, although permanent neural function loss can occur. Complete ablation seems realistic for smaller lesions; for larger lesions symptom control should be the focus.

Indexed as

AgedCarcinoma, Renal CellElectroporationFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18Follow-Up StudiesHumansKidney NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyRadiopharmaceuticalsRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesSigmoid NeoplasmsFluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsAblationFeasibilityLocoregional neoplasm recurrencePelvic regionPeripheral nerves

Identifiers

PMID28470395
PMCPMC5581368
OpenAlexW2611100007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.