Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30505967›Full record

ReviewTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2018

Palliative therapy in pancreatic cancer-interventional treatment with radiofrequency ablation/irreversible electroporation.

Salvatore Paiella, Matteo De Pastena, Mirko D'Onofrio, Stefano Francesco Crinò, Teresa Lucia Pan, Riccardo De Robertis, Giovanni Elio, Enrico Martone, Claudio Bassi, Roberto Salvia

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Salvatore PaiellaGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Matteo De PastenaGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Mirko D'OnofrioRadiology Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Stefano Francesco CrinòGastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Teresa Lucia PanGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Riccardo De RobertisRadiology Unit, Ospedale Pederzoli, Peschiera del Garda, Verona, Italy.
Giovanni ElioGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Enrico MartoneRadiology Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Claudio BassiGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Roberto SalviaGeneral and Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Pancreas Institute, University of Verona, Policlinico GB Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
University of Verona · ITCasa di Cura Villa Garda · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a solid tumor with still a dismal prognosis. Diagnosis is usually late, when the disease is metastatic or locally advanced (LAPC). Only 20% of PC are amenable to surgery at the time of diagnosis and the vast majority of them, despite radically resected will unavoidably recur. The treatment of LAPC is a challenge. Current guidelines suggest to adopt systemic therapies upfront, based on multi-drugs chemotherapy regimens. However, the vast majority of patients will never experience conversion to surgical exploration and radical resection. Thus, there a large subgroup of LAPC patients where the only therapeutic chance is to offer palliative treatments, such as interventional ablative treatments, in order to obtain a cytoreduction of the tumor, trying to delay its growth and spread. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and irreversible electroporation (IRE) demonstrated to be safe and effective in obtaining a local control of the disease with some promising oncological results in terms of overall survival (OS). However, they should be adopted as a treatment strategy to adopt in parallel with other systemic therapies, within multidisciplinary choices. They are not free from complications, even serious, thus they should applied only in specialized centers of pancreatology. This review depicts the state of the art of the two techniques.

Indexed as

irreversible electroporation (IRE)locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)Pancreatic cancer (PC)radiofrequency ablation (RFA)

Identifiers

PMID30505967
PMCPMC6232064
OpenAlexW2898604123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.