ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2023
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound guidance improves the therapeutic efficacy of radiofrequency ablation in liver cancer patients.
Article in American journal of translational research, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The treatment response evaluation through the combination of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and squamous cell carcinoma antigen in cervical cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Prediction of hepatic artery occlusion after liver transplantation by ultrasound characteristics and clinical risk factors.World journal of radiology · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS)-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of liver cancer and its effect on patients' immune function.
methodsClinical data of 84 liver cancer patients admitted to the Shandong Qishan Hospital from March 2018 to March 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to differences in treatment methods, patients were divided into a research group (42 cases treated by CEUS-guided RFA) and a control group (42 cases treated by RFA under conventional ultrasound). Clinical efficacy of two groups was observed two months after surgery. Liver function as well as IgA, IgG and IgM levels were evaluated. The incidence of complications, quality of life and survival were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe complete inactivation rate of large lesions in the research group was 23.81%, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (4.76%). Before treatment, the two groups showed similar levels of IgA, IgG and IgM. After treatment, significantly increased levels were observed in both groups, but the research group had higher IgA, IgG and IgM levels as compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The quality of life scores increased in both groups after the intervention, and the score in the research group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05). The progression-free survival of patients in the research group (12.28±5.42) was longer than that of patients in the control group (8.50±4.47; P < 0.05).
conclusionsComparing to RFA guided by conventional ultrasound, RFA guided by CEUS can reduce liver damage, lower the incidence of complications, enhance the body's immune system, and improve local control rate and progression-free survival time in patients with liver cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37434841PMC10331678W4383998310What 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.