ArticleEuropean radiology2023
Risk prediction of intraoperative pain in percutaneous microwave ablation of lung tumors under CT guidance.
Article in European radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effect of intraoperative pain in microwave ablation of lung tumors (MWALT) on local efficacy and establish the pain risk prediction model.
methodsIt was a retrospectively study. Consecutive patients with MWALT from September 2017 to December 2020 were divided into mild and severe pain groups. Local efficacy was evaluated by comparing technical success, technical effectiveness, and local progression-free survival (LPFS) in two groups. All cases were randomly allocated into training and validation cohorts at a ratio of 7:3. A nomogram model was established using predictors identified by logistics regression in training dataset. The calibration curves, C-statistic, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate the accuracy, ability, and clinical value of the nomogram.
resultsA total of 263 patients (mild pain group: n = 126; severe pain group: n = 137) were included in the study. Technical success rate and technical effectiveness rate were 100% and 99.2% in the mild pain group and 98.5% and 97.8% in the severe pain group. LPFS rates at 12 and 24 months were 97.6% and 87.6% in the mild pain group and 91.9% and 79.3% in the severe pain group (p = 0.034; HR: 1.90). The nomogram was established based on three predictors: depth of nodule, puncture depth, and multi-antenna. The prediction ability and accuracy were verified by C-statistic and calibration curve. DCA curve suggested the proposed prediction model was clinically useful.
conclusionsSevere intraoperative pain in MWALT reduced the local efficacy. An established prediction model could accurately predict severe pain and assist physicians in choosing a suitable anesthesia type. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study firstly provides a prediction model for the risk of severe intraoperative pain in MWALT. Physicians can choose a suitable anesthesia type based on pain risk, in order to improve patients' tolerance as well as local efficacy of MWALT. KEY POINTS: • The severe intraoperative pain in MWALT reduced the local efficacy. • Predictors of severe intraoperative pain in MWALT were the depth of nodule, puncture depth, and multi-antenna. • The prediction model established in this study can accurately predict the risk of severe pain in MWALT and assist physicians in choosing a suitable anesthesia type.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37382619What 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.