ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2022
Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for subphrenic hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparison of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation to percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Adaptive radiofrequency ablation using an Octopus multipurpose electrode for small hepatocellular carcinoma adjacent to critical structures: a prospective single-center pilot feasibility study.Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea) · 2026Article
- Application of laparoscopic intraoperative ultrasound in laparoscopic hepatic resection for liver tumor.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Benefits and drawbacks of radiofrequency ablationWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Effectiveness and safety of sequential transarterial chemoembolization and microwave ablation for subphrenic hepatocellular carcinoma: A comprehensive evaluation.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Comparisons of Percutaneous Ablation, Open or Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage 0-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Concurrent Generalized Propensity Score Analysis.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2024Article
- Review
- Ablative strategies for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of hepatology · 2023Review
- 2022 Korean Liver Cancer Association-National Cancer Center Korea Practice Guidelines for Local Ablation Therapy of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: What's New?Korean journal of radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRadiofrequency ablation is a curative treatment option for very early-stage or earlystage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) for subphrenic tumors is technically challenging. Laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) has been used to overcome this disadvantage. This study compared the treatment outcomes between LRFA and PRFA for subphrenic HCC.
methodsThis retrospective study screened patients who underwent PRFA or LRFA for subphrenic HCC between 2013 and 2018. Therapeutic outcomes, including local tumor progression (LTP), intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR), extrahepatic metastasis (EM), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), were compared between the two groups.
resultsThirty patients in the PRFA group and 23 patients in the LRFA group were included. LTP was observed in six patients in the PRFA group (20%), but in no patients in the LRFA group. The cumulative LTP rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 3.7%, 23.4%, and 23.4%, respectively, in the PRFA group and 0.0% in the LRFA group (P=0.015). The IDR, EM, and DFS rates were not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.304, P=0.175, and P=0.075, respectively). The OS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 96.6%, 85.7%, and 71.6%, respectively, in the PRFA group and 100%, 95.7%, and 95.7%, respectively, in the LRFA group (P=0.049).
conclusionLRFA demonstrated better therapeutic outcomes than did PRFA for subphrenic tumors in terms of LTP and OS. Therefore, LRFA can be considered as the first-line treatment option for subphrenic HCC.
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.