ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal oncology2022
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided ablation of solid pancreatic lesions: A systematic review of early outcomes with pooled analysis.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Locoregional Therapies and Remodeling of Tumor Microenvironment in Pancreatic Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Recent Developments in the Field of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment of Pancreatic Lesions.Cancers · 2023Review
- EUS-guided interventional therapies for pancreatic diseases.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) is emerging as a complementary therapeutic approach for pancreatic solid masses. However, results of published data are difficult to interpret because of a retrospective design and small sample size.
aimTo systematically review data on EUS-RFA for solid lesions and to pool the results of the different experiences in order to provide more consistent evidence in terms of safety and efficacy.
methodsA comprehensive systematic literature search on the main databases was performed to identify articles in which patients with pancreatic solid lesions underwent EUS-RFA. The primary outcomes were procedure-related adverse events (AEs) and mortality. Secondary outcomes were the technical success rate and the effects on primary tumor growth. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata version 14.0.
resultsIn total, 14 studies were included, with 120 patients undergoing 153 ablations of 129 solid pancreatic lesions. The STARmed technology was used in seven studies, the Habib system in six studies, and the HybridTherm probe in one study. The pooled technical success rate was 99.0% (
conclusionThe present pooled analysis confirms the safety and feasibility of EUS-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.