ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2022
Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of solitary hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: risk factors of local tumor progression-free survival and overall survival.
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 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.
- Thermal ablation versus hepatectomy for solitary colorectal liver metastases up to 5 cm: a multicenter target trial emulation on safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- A Comparison of Five-Year Survival Rates Between Thermal Ablation and Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Cancer Metastasis to the Liver: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of oncology · 2026Article
- Planned Liver Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Residual Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases After Surgery: A Single-Arm Retrospective Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- No-Touch Radiofrequency Ablation for Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 2023 Korean Society of Image-Guided Tumor Ablation Guidelines.Korean journal of radiology · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) and overall survival (OS) after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for solitary colorectal liver metastases (CLM) <3 cm and to identify the risk factors associated with poor LTPFS and OS after percutaneous RFA.
methodsThis study screened 219 patients who underwent percutaneous RFA for CLM between January 2013 and November 2020. Of these, 92 patients with a single CLM <3 cm were included. LTPFS and OS were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the differences between curves were compared using the log-rank test. Risk factors for LTPFS and OS were assessed using Cox proportional-hazard regression models.
resultsTechnical efficacy was achieved in the first (n=91) or second (n=1) RFA sessions. During the follow-up (median, 20.0 months), cumulative LTPFS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 92.4%, 83.4%, and 76.5%, respectively. During the follow-up (median, 27.8 months), the corresponding OS rates were 97.5%, 81.3%, and 74.8%, respectively. In multivariable Cox regression analyses, the group with both tumor-puncturing RFA and a T4 stage primary tumor (hazard ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 10.2; P=0.037) had poor LTPFS. In the univariable analysis, no factors were significantly associated with poor OS.
conclusionBoth LTPFS and OS were promising after percutaneous RFA for a single CLM <3 cm. The group with both tumor-puncturing RFA and a T4 stage primary tumor showed poor LTPFS. No risk factors were identified for poor OS.
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.