ArticleHippokratia
Ablation techniques in non-small cell lung cancer patients: experience of a single center.
Article in Hippokratia. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathological characteristics of cervical lymph node metastases in papillary thyroid carcinoma compared with lung adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Ablation for Single Pulmonary Nodules, Primary or Metastatic. Εndobronchial Ablation Systems or Percutaneous.Journal of Cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPercutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are well-established treatments for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of RFA and MWA performed on NSCLC patients. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis retrospective study included one hundred twenty-four patients with NSCLC who underwent percutaneous ablation from November 2014 to November 2020 in the Department of Medical Imaging and Interventional Radiology of Sotiria General Hospital for Chest Diseases in Athens, Greece. Forty (stage IA) were treated with RFA, while 84 were treated with MWA (stages IA, IB, and IIA). All procedures were performed using the AMICA GEN radiofrequency and microwave generator. As a follow-up method, computed tomography was performed immediately after the procedure to evaluate the lesion's response and complications and one, three, six, and twelve months after the ablation.
resultsAll ablations were technically successful. The first-month follow-up revealed stage IIA residual tumors in eight patients. Local recurrence was detected one year after RFA in two of the 40 patients and thirteen of the 84 patients after MWA. Overall survival (OS) rates at one, two, and three years for stage IA NSCLC patients treated with ablation were 94 %, 73 %, 57 % for RFA, and 96 %, 75 %, and 62 % for MWA, respectively. In contrast, the OS for stages IB and IIA patients treated with MWA was 90 %, 66 %, and 51 % for the IB stage and 82 %, 62 %, and 48 % for the IIA stage, respectively. Fifteen percent of patients after RFA and 9.5 % after MWA experienced minor complications. Pneumothorax was documented in three patients after RFA and four after MWA. Post-ablation syndrome occurred in 15 % of RFA patients and 8.3 % of MWA patients. There were no major complications.
conclusionRFA and MWA have comparable efficacy and safety for patients in stage IA. MWA is an effective alternative treatment option for non-resectable IB or IIA stages NSCLC patients. HIPPOKRATIA 2022, 26 (3):105-109.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37324042PMC10266325W4380870372What 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.