ReviewCurrent oncology reports2019
The Role of Ablation in Cancer Pain Relief.
Review in Current oncology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Electrochemotherapy in the Treatment of Bone Metastases: A Narrative Review.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Review
- Neuropathic Pain in Cancer: What Are the Current Guidelines?Current treatment options in oncology · 2024Review
- Robot-Assisted 2D Fluoroscopic Needle Placement-A Phantom Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Management of cancer pain due to bone metastasis.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2023Review
- Ablative Techniques for Sarcoma Metastatic Disease: Current Role and Clinical Applications.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Neurotoxins subvert the allosteric activation mechanism of SARM1 to induce neuronal loss.Cell reports · 2021Article
- Cancer induced bone pain: current management and future perspectives.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this article is to describe the concepts of ablation techniques for pain relief in symptomatic oncologic patients. Controversies concerning techniques and products will be addressed. RECENT
findingsDespite conventional pain palliative techniques, cancer patients often endorse unresolved somatic and neuropathic pain that can present as a great burden to quality of life. In non-operative patients, several techniques have been applied to minimize opioid dependence. While radiotherapy is often considered as a non-invasive option, percutaneous ablation has been advanced as a minimally-invasive alternative with clear procedural and outcome advantages. Similar to radiation therapy, percutaneous ablation techniques can act either upon nerve structures responsible for pain mediation signals (neurolysis) or directly upon the tumor to relieve tumor-mediated inflammation and decompress tumor compression of adjacent structures. Percutaneous ablation provides valuable neurolysis and tumor-directed pain palliative effects to be incorporated into clinical guidelines for pain reduction in oncologic patients. Selection among different ablation techniques should be based upon an individually tailored approach, to include consideration of all treatment modalities.
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.