ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2023
Microwave ablation as a primary versus secondary treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to analyze and compare the outcomes of percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) when used as a primary vs. secondary treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsThe clinical data of 192 patients with HCC treated with MWA between January 2012 and July 2021 were reviewed retrospectively, with 152 patients being treatment naïve (primary treatment) vs. 40 who had residual or recurrent disease following previous trans-arterial chemoembolization or trans-arterial radioembolization (secondary treatment). The primary outcomes were primary technical efficacy, 1- and 3-year local recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), local recurrence rates, and adverse events. Pre- and post-intervention liver function tests were compared using a Wilcoxon signed rank test. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also performed, looking at prognostic factors associated with OS and local RFS.
resultsThere was no significant difference in 1-year local RFS (primary 93.6% vs. secondary 93.7;
conclusionMicrowave ablation is safe and effective as a secondary treatment for patients with HCC in a clinical salvage scenario and should be utilized more frequently.
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.