ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2021
Combination therapy by transarterial injection of miriplatin-iodized oil suspension with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus microwave ablation (MWA) for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparison of therapeutic efficacy.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Combination Therapy by Transarterial Injection of Miriplatin-Iodized Oil Suspension with Microwave Ablation for Medium-Sized Hepatocellular Carcinoma: the Preliminary Experience.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the technical efficacy and complications of the transarterial injection of a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA) in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 123 HCCs in 101 patients treated with the transarterial injection of a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension and RFA (MPT-RFA) (maximum diameter: 1.5 [Formula: see text] 0.5 cm, range: 0.6-3.0 cm) and 68 HCCs in 49 patients treated with the transarterial injection of a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension and MWA (MPT-MWA) (maximum diameter: 1.6 [Formula: see text] 0.7 cm, range: 0.5-3.0 cm). Technical success was defined as the achievement of an ablative margin of at least 5 mm for each tumor. Technical success, complications, and local tumor progression were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe initial technical success rate was significantly higher with MPT-MWA (94.1%) than with MPT-RFA (76.4%; P = 0.003). The number of treatment sessions per nodule was significantly lower with MPT-MWA (1.1) than with MPT-RFA (1.3) (P = 0.004). The major complication rates were similar with MPT-RFA (5.8%) and MPT-MWA (2.7%) (P = 0.391). The one-year local tumor progression rate was similar between MPT-RFA (0%) and MPT-MWA (0%) (P = 0.73).
conclusionMPT-MWA may have improved therapeutic efficiency in the treatment of small HCCs.
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.