ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)
MRI-TRUS fusion for electrode positioning during irreversible electroporation for treatment of prostate cancer.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comparative Modeling Study of Thermal Mitigation Strategies in Irreversible Electroporation Treatments.Journal of heat transfer · 2022Article
- Ultrasound fusion biopsy.Der Radiologe · 2021Review
- Irreversible Electroporation for Prostate Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- "Super-active surveillance": MRI ultrasound fusion biopsy and ablation for less invasive management of prostate cancer.Gland surgery · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to introduce an approach for image-guided positioning of electrodes for irreversible electroporation (IRE) in patients with prostate cancer using a magnetic resonance imaging-transrectal ultrasonography (MRI-TRUS) fusion technique. In 10 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven Gleason score ≤3+4 prostate cancer, 19 G electrodes were inserted into the prostate using a transperineal access. Magnetic resonance images of the prostate acquired before IRE were fused with transrectal ultrasound images acquired during IRE. The position of the ultrasound probe was tracked via a sensor and corresponding magnetic resonance images were calculated in real-time. While MRI allowed delineation of the target volume, the position of the electrodes could be visualized on ultrasound images; the distance between individual electrode pairs was measured. Based on these measurements the software installed on the IRE unit was able to calculate the voltage necessary to generate the electric field for ablation. Using contrast-enhanced ultrasound, changes in perfusion within the ablation zone after IRE were documented. This technique allowed positioning of the electrodes around the target volume under image guidance in all patients treated with IRE. The target lesion and a safety margin were covered within the estimated ablation zone. MRI-TRUS guidance for IRE combines the advantages of good visualization of the target lesion on MRI with the ability of ultrasound to acquire imaging in real-time with a mobile device.
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.