ArticleLasers in medical science2024
Comparative efficacies and safeties of cylindrical interstitial laser ablation and radiofrequency ablation on swine pancreas.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optical-thermal modeling and treatment planning of ICG-enhanced interstitial photothermal therapy using cylindrical diffuser fibers.Lasers in medical science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Laser ablation (LA) has been evaluated for the minimally invasive thermal treatment of various cancers, but conventional unidirectional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided LA has limitations. Therefore, we developed a cylindrical laser diffuser to overcome the limitations of unidirectional EUS-guided LA. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacies and safeties of EUS-guided LA using a novel cylindrical laser diffuser and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in vivo in swine pancreas. EUS-guided RFA (15 W, 30 s, 450 J) and cylindrical interstitial LA (CILA) (5 W, 90 s, 450 J) were applied to normal pancreatic tissue in six anesthetized pigs (three per group). Laboratory tests were performed at baseline, immediately after ablation (day 0), and 2 days after procedures (day 2). Two days after procedures, all pigs were sacrificed, and histopathological safety and efficacy assessments were performed. Technically, EUS-guided RFA and CILA were performed successfully in all cases. No major complications, including perforation or acute pancreatitis, occurred during the experiment in either group. All animals remained in excellent condition throughout the experimental period, and laboratory tests provided no evidence of a major complication. Average necrotic volumes in the RFA and CILA groups were 424.2 mm
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.