ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023
High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (Sonablate
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe reported preliminary outcomes of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) [Sonablate
methodsSeventy-seven patients using Sonablate
resultsOverall, 19.5% of patients were low-risk, 36.4% were intermediate-risk, and 44.1% were high-risk according to the D'Amico risk classification. The median follow-up was 12.09 ± 5.85 months, and the biochemical-free survival rates for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 100% (15/15), 96.4% (27/28), and 79.4% (27/34), respectively. Four patients (5.2%) received salvage radiotherapy and all maintained biochemical-free survival. The mean IPSS and QoL scores before versus after HIFU were 10.4 versus 6.8 (p = 0.003) and 3.2 versus 3.0 (p = 0.096), respectively. There was no statistically significant change in preoperative and postoperative IIEF scores (20.6 vs. 19; p = 0.062) in patients who had an IIEF score of >15 at baseline and received nerve-sparing procedures (subtotal ablation).
conclusionsThe results of Sonablate
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.