ArticleCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society2020
Clinical efficacy and prognostic factors of CT-guided
Article in Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical efficacy and prognostic factors of CT-guided radioactive iodine-125 seed implantation for the treatment of superficial soft tissue metastasis: a 12-year retrospective analysis.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Palliative Care: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2023Review
- Clinical efficacy of CT-guidedInsights into imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDue to the unique anatomical location of retroperitoneal metastatic lymph nodes, current treatment options are limited. This study was designed to explore the clinical efficacy and prognostic factors of CT-guided
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 92 patients received
resultsThe median LTPFS was 8 months. Metastatic lymph node with uniform density (p-0.009), clear boundaries (p-0.011), regular morphology (P < 0.001), and < 3 organs at risk of metastasis (p-0.020) were associated with better LTPFS. Necrotic lymph nodes (p < 0.001), fusion (p-0.003), and invasion of vessels visible on images (p < 0.001) were associated with poor LTPFS. Puncture path through abdominal wall or paravertebral approach were also associated with better LTPFS than a hepatic approach (P < 0.05). A maximum diameter ≤ 3 cm (P-0.031) or 3-5 cm (P-0.018) were also associated with significantly better LTPFS than a maximum diameter ≥ 5 cm. The Cox proportional hazards model suggested that lymph nodes invaded the large vessels visible on images, maximum diameter and puncture path were independent risk factors for LTPFS.
conclusionCT-guided
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.