Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36601606›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical imaging science2022

Current perspectives on microwave ablation of liver lesions in difficult locations.

Merve Ozen, Driss Raissi

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical imaging science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Ablation versus Radiation Segmentectomy for Small Liver Tumors.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Merve OzenDepartment of Radiology, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0469-8808
Driss RaissiDepartment of Radiology, Medicine, Surgery, and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, Lexington, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0469-8808
University of Kentucky · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microwave ablation (MWA) is becoming the standard of care in treating liver lesions smaller than 3 cm benefiting from a plethora of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) data in the literature. Some of the advantages of MWA compared to RFA are as follows: Faster ablations, more reproducible and predictable heating, better thermal conductivity in different liver tissue environments, and less susceptibility to heat-sink effect. Despite its many advantages, there are still concerns regarding MWA use in high-risk locations such as near portal veins, near the bile ducts, and near the heart. Some centers have historically considered these tumor locations as a contraindication to percutaneous thermal ablation. In this review, we summarize the current data on the safety of MWA of liver tumors in challenging locations. We also discuss several technical tips with examples provided.

Indexed as

AblationAblation contraindicationLiverLocationMetastasisMicrowaveTransplantTumor

Identifiers

PMID36601606
PMCPMC9805601
OpenAlexW4310494137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.