ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Feasibility and safety of bipolar radiofrequency track cautery during percutaneous image-guided abdominal biopsy procedures.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coaxial liver biopsy with tract electrocauterization: technique and outcomes in high-risk patients with suspected hepatocellular carcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Splenic imaging and non-vascular intervention: when to intervene on the spleen and how to do it safely.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Image-guided renal parenchymal biopsies- how we do it.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
- Bipolar radiofrequency track cautery during abdominal biopsies: teaching points and lessons learned.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of using a bipolar radiofrequency track cautery device during percutaneous image-guided abdominal biopsy procedures in at-risk patients.
methodsForty-two patients (26-79 years old; female 44%) with at least one bleeding risk factor who underwent an abdominal image-guided (CT or US) biopsy and intended bipolar radiofrequency track cautery (BRTC) were retrospectively studied. An 18G radiofrequency electrode was inserted through a 17G biopsy introducer needle immediately following coaxial 18G core biopsy, to cauterize the biopsy track using temperature control. Bleeding risk factors, technical success, and adverse events were recorded.
resultsBRTC was technically successful in 41/42 (98%) of procedures; in one patient, the introducer needle retracted from the liver due to respiratory motion prior to BRTC. BRTC following percutaneous biopsy was applied during 41 abdominal biopsy procedures (renal mass = 12, renal parenchyma = 10, liver mass = 9, liver parenchyma = 5, splenic mass or parenchyma = 4, gastrohepatic mass = 1). All patients had one or more of the following risk factors: high-risk organ (spleen or renal parenchyma), hypervascular mass, elevated prothrombin time, renal insufficiency, thrombocytopenia, recent anticoagulation or anticoagulation not withheld for recommended interval, cirrhosis, intraprocedural hypertension, brisk back bleeding observed from the introducer needle, or subcapsular tumor location. No severe adverse events (grade 3 or higher) occurred. Two (2/41, 5%) mild (grade 1) bleeding events did not cause symptoms or require intervention.
conclusionBipolar radiofrequency track cautery was feasible and safe during percutaneous image-guided abdominal biopsy procedures. IRB approval: MBG 2022P002277.
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.