ArticleClinical and molecular hepatology2021
New next-generation microwave thermosphere ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Clinical and molecular hepatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Article
- The impact of ultrasound contrast-enhanced fusion virtual navigation technology-guided microwave ablation (MWA) and standard MWA on the local tumor progression of hepatocellular carcinoma with unclear ultrasound images.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Optimizing Treatment Selection for Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on Tumor Biology, Liver Function, and Patient Status.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Review
- Development of a weighted Alpha-Fetoprotein tumor burden score-integrated nomogram for predicting overall survival in locally ablated hepatocellular carcinoma patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Next-Generation Microwave Thermosphere Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Primarily Hepatitis-Related Etiology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Loco-regional therapies competing with radiofrequency ablation in potential indications for hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2023Article
- Anatomical ablation for small hepatocellular carcinomas using multiple applicators: a preliminary study.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2023Article
- A clinical study on microwave ablation of multifocal (≤ 3) T1N0M0 papillary thyroid carcinoma.European radiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Recent therapeutics in hepatocellular carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 2023Review
- Article
- Microwave thermosphere versus radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Are we approaching the time to end the debate?Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2021Article
- Combination of Ablation and Immunotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Where We Are and Where to Go.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsIn July 2017, the Emprint™ next-generation microwave ablation system using thermosphere technology (Covidien, Boulder, CO, USA) was approved for use in Japan. This system can produce a predictable spherical ablation zone at higher temperatures than radiofrequency ablation (RFA). The aim of the present study was to elucidate whether this new microwave thermosphere ablation (MTA) could safely improve outcome compared to RFA, which is the standard of care for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed 513 patients with 630 HCCs (≤3 cm) who were performed by percutaneous RFA (174 patients, 214 HCCs) or MTA (339 patients, 416 HCCs) between January 2016 and March 2020.
resultsMedian ablation time was significantly shorter for MTA (240 seconds) than for RFA (721 seconds; P<0.001). A significant difference in 3-year local tumor progression rate was evident between the RFA group (22%) and MTA group (8%; P<0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed ablation procedure and tumor diameter as independent factors contributing to local tumor progression (MTA; P<0.001; hazard ratio, 0.565; 95% confidence interval, 0.437-0.731). In patients with primary HCC, a significant difference in overall survival was evident (RFA vs. MTA, 3-year, 77% vs. 95%, P=0.029). Ablation procedure and Child-Pugh score were independent factors contributing to survival. The total complication rate was significantly lower for MTA (8%) than for RFA (14%, P<0.05), particularly for bile duct injury (3% vs. 9%, respectively; P<0.05).
conclusionNext-generation MTA for small HCC could provide safer, more curative treatment in a shorter ablation time than RFA.
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.