ReviewSeminars in interventional radiology2022
The Latest on Lung Ablation.
Review in Seminars in interventional radiology, 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.
- Safety and Efficacy of Bronchoscopic Pulsed Electric Field Ablation for Lung Cancer and Metastases.JTO clinical and research reports · 2026Article
- Article
- The evolving role of wedge resection in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a literature review.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
- Thoracoscopic pulmonary resection combined with real-time image-guided percutaneous ablation for multiple pulmonary nodules: a novel surgical approach and literature review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Transition from multiportal video-assisted thoracic surgery to uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery… and evolution to uniportal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery?Annals of cardiothoracic surgery · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung cancer is the second most common cancer in both men and women. Despite smoking cessation efforts and advances in lung cancer detection and treatment, long-term survival remains low. For early-stage primary lung carcinoma, surgical resection offers the best chance of long-term survival; however, only about one-third of patients are surgical candidates. For nonsurgical candidates, minimally invasive percutaneous thermal ablation therapies have become recognized as safe and effective treatment alternatives, including radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryoablation. Lung ablation is also an acceptable treatment for limited oligometastatic and oligorecurrent diseases. This article discusses the technologies and techniques available for tumor ablation of thoracic malignancies, as well as new treatments on the horizon.
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.