ArticleJournal of interventional medicine2020
Effectiveness and safety of irreversible electroporation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma ineligible for thermal ablation after surgery.
Article in Journal of interventional medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Bioimpedance assessment method based on back propagation neural network for irreversible electroporation of liver tissue.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Combination of natural killer cell-based immunotherapy and irreversible electroporation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
- A Retrospective Comparison of CT Imaging and Computational Simulations of Irreversible Electroporation in the Liver.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo preliminarily evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of computed tomography (CT) image-guided irreversible electroporation (IRE) for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after surgical resection.
methodsFrom January 2016 to February 2018, 18 patients diagnosed with recurrent HCC after surgical resection received IRE under CT image guidance for 22 tumors. Patients were enrolled for IRE when ineligible for thermal ablation due to tumor location. Clinical records and imaging data were reviewed to assess complete ablation rate, local tumor progression free rate (LTPFR), local tumor progression free survival (LTPFS) and complications after a median follow-up time of 14 months.
resultsSuccessful complete ablations were achieved in 20/22 (90.1%) tumors. Mean LTPFS was 10.5 ± 9.4 months. Overall 3-, 6- and 12-months LTPFR in 22 tumors following IRE were 68.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45%-83%), 59.1% (95% CI: 33%-76%) and 36.4% (95% CI: 17%-56%), respectively. Complications included pneumothorax (2/18, 11.1%), localized pain (3/18, 16.7%), bile duct dilation (1/18, 5.6%) and transient hypertension (1/18, 5.6%). No major complications or treatment-related deaths were observed. The alpha-fetoprotein levels of two patients decreased to the normal range at 3 and 4 months, respectively.
conclusionsThis study showed that percutaneous CT image-guided IRE can serve as a safe and effective treatment for recurrent HCC not suitable for thermal ablation.
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.