Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38314081›Full record

ReviewIndian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India

Irreversible electroporation as a focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review.

Pushan Prabhakar, Arjun Pon Avudaiappan, Mayer Sandman, Ahmed Eldefrawy, Jorge Caso, Govindarajan Narayanan, Murugesan Manoharan

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pushan PrabhakarDivision of Urologic Oncologic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA.
Arjun Pon AvudaiappanDivision of Urologic Oncologic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA.
Mayer SandmanDepartment of Urology, Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA.
Ahmed EldefrawyDivision of Urologic Oncologic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA.
Jorge CasoDivision of Urologic Oncologic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA.
Govindarajan NarayananDivision of Urologic Oncologic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA.
Murugesan ManoharanDivision of Urologic Oncologic Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, Florida, USA.
Dr. Herbert & Nicole Wertheim Family Foundation · USThe Cardiac and Vascular Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a new and promising focal therapy for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. In this systematic review, we summarize the literature on IRE for prostate cancer published over the last decade. Methods: PubMed and EMBASE were searched with the end date of May 2023 to find relevant publications on prostate cancer ablation using IRE. Original studies with focal IRE as the primary curative treatment which reported on functional or oncological outcomes were included. The bibliography of relevant studies was also scanned to identify suitable articles. Results: A total of 14 studies reporting on 899 patients treated with IRE for localized prostate cancer were included. Of all the studies reviewed, 77% reported on recurrence within the zone of ablation, and it ranged from 0% to 38.9% for in-field and 3.6% to 28% for out-of-field recurrence. Although, a standardised follow-up protocol was not followed, all the studies employed serial prostate-specific antigen monitoring, a multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging, and a biopsy (6-12 months post-treatment). Across all the studies, 58% reported that the urinary continence returned to the pretreatment levels and 25% reported a minor decrease in the continence from the baseline at 12-months of follow-up. Erections sufficient for intercourse varied from 44% to 75% at the baseline to 55% to 100% at 12-months of follow-up across all the studies. Conclusion: IRE, as a focal therapy, shows promising results with minimal complications and reasonably effective oncological control, but the data comparing it to the standard of care is still lacking. Future research should focus on randomized definitive comparisons between IRE, radical prostatectomy, and radiation therapy.

Identifiers

PMID38314081
PMCPMC10836445
OpenAlexW4390405372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.