Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31918433›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Comparisons of recurrence-free survival and overall survival between microwave versus radiofrequency ablation treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: A multiple centers retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching.

Shibin Du, Jian-Zhi Yang, Jing Chen, Wei-Gang Zhou, Yan-Yan Sun

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. [The consensus on tertiary prevention of primary liver cancer (2022 version)].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2022
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Shibin DuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shenzhen University Clinical Medical Academy, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen University General Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Jian-Zhi YangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hanzhong Central Hospital, Hanzhong, Shanxi, China.
Jing ChenDepartment of Endocrinology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
Wei-Gang ZhouDepartment of Anesthesiology, Hanzhong Central Hospital, Hanzhong, Shanxi, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2717-3169
Yan-Yan SunDepartment of Anesthesiology, Shenzhen University Clinical Medical Academy, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen University General Hospital, Shenzhen, China.
Hanzhong Central Hospital · CNShenzhen University · CNKunming Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both microwave (MW) ablation and radiofrequency (RF) ablation are widely used for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treatments in clinic. However, it is still unclear if ablative methods could influence the recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) of HCC patients. Therefore, we carried out this multi-center retrospective cohort study to investigate the differences of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) between MW ablation and RF ablation by survival analysis. From January 2014 to December 2016, patients who received thermal ablation surgery for HCC treatment were screened. Finally, 452 patients met the eligibility criteria and finished the follow-up. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify independent predictive factors of the RFS and OS. Also, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the bias between two groups. Finally, we found that before the PSM, the univariable and multivariable regression analyses revealed that there were no significant differences on the RFS between two groups. Same results were obtained for the OS. After PSM, 115 pairs of patients were created, and both the univariable and multivariable regression analyses suggested that there were still no significant differences on the RFS between two groups. Same results were obtained for the OS. In conclusion, our present study showed that there were no significant differences between MW ablation and RF ablation for HCC patients on the RFS or OS.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCarcinoma, HepatocellularFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMicrowavesMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreRadiofrequency AblationRetrospective StudiesSurvival AnalysisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31918433
PMCPMC6952252
OpenAlexW2999038478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.