Trial reportThe lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology2025
Software-based versus visual assessment of the minimal ablative margin in patients with liver tumours undergoing percutaneous thermal ablation (COVER-ALL): a randomised phase 2 trial.
Trial report in The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04083378 (Clinical Impact of a Volumetric Image Method for Confirming Tumor Coverage With Ablation on Patients With Malignant Liver Lesions), which is not on this map. Cited by 50 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.
Clinical Impact of a Volumetric Image Method for Confirming Tumor Coverage With Ablation on Patients With Malignant Liver Lesions (COVER-ALL)
Who cites it
50 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying Functional Liver Volume Loss after CT-guided Percutaneous Thermal Ablation: A COVER-ALL Trial Post Hoc Analysis.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Trial
- Undertreated Volume and Tumor Morphology as Predictors of Outcome Following Thermal Ablation of 3-7-cm Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2025Trial
- Results from the Pan-European CIEMAR study: Local Tumour Control After Microwave Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases and Exploratory Associations with Ablation Margins and Confirmation Software.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- ASO Editorial: Solitary Colorectal Liver Metastasis: An Old Dog Learns New Tricks.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Precision of Ablation Margin Assessment After Liver Microwave Ablation: A Head-to-Head Comparison of Visual and Software-Assisted Methods.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of an Irreversible Electroporation System with Real-Time Electrical and Thermal Monitoring for Liver Tumors: A Bicentric Retrospective Study.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Observational
- Review
- Percutaneous Cryoablation Versus Microwave Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Comparative Study of Safety and Oncologic Outcomes.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2026Article
- Long-Term Oncological Outcomes After Laparoscopic Resection and Thermal Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases Within a Parenchyma-Sparing Strategy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Colorectal Liver Metastases in the Post-COLLISION Era: Choosing the Right Local Tool, not the Winning Modality.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- BioDeformUNet: A Deep Learning Model for Biomechanically Informed Liver Image Registration.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Automatic MRI-Based segmentation of ablation zones in spine and liver: A comparative study of network performance and influencing factors.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Intra-procedural CT control versus ultrasound only in ultrasound-guided thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases: a single-centre cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
- A Real-World Evaluation of Failure Detection for Liver CT Segmentation.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Tumour Localisation Technologies in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Scoping Review of Marking and Detection Methods.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Impact of time to ablation on survival outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases: an inverse probability-weighted cohort study.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- ESR Innovation in Focus: AI in interventional radiology: existing applications and ongoing research.European radiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Robotic-assisted needle placement in CT-guided percutaneous ablation in the abdomen: the SaFE post-market study.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTumour coverage with an optimal minimal ablative margin is crucial for improving local control of liver tumours following thermal ablation. The minimal ablative margin has traditionally been assessed through visual inspection of co-registered CT images. However, rates of local tumour control after thermal ablation are highly variable with visual assessment. We aimed to assess the use of a novel software-based method for minimal ablative margin assessment that incorporates biomechanical deformable image registration and artificial intelligence (AI)-based autosegmentation.
methodsThe COVER-ALL randomised, phase 2, superiority trial was conducted at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with up to three histology-agnostic liver tumours measuring 1-5 cm and undergoing CT-guided thermal ablation were enrolled. Thermal ablation was performed with the aim of achieving a minimal ablative margin of 5 mm or greater. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to the experimental group (software-based assessment) or the control group (visual assessment) by use of dynamic minimisation to balance covariates. Randomisation was performed intraprocedurally after placement of the ablation applicator. Assessment of oncological outcomes and adverse events were masked to treatment allocation. All analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary endpoint was the minimal ablative margin on post-ablation intraprocedural CT. A preplanned interim analysis for superiority was done at 50% patient enrolment. Adverse events were recorded with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04083378), and recruitment is complete.
findingsPatients were enrolled and treated with thermal ablation between June 15, 2020, and Oct 5, 2023. 26 patients were randomly assigned to the control group (mean age 58·1 [SD 14·8] years; 18 [69%] male and eight [31%] female; 11 [42%] colorectal cancer liver metastasis; median tumour diameter 1·7 cm [IQR 1·3-2·3]) and 24 to the experimental group (mean age 60·5 [14·4] years; 16 [67%] male and eight [33%] female; ten [42%] colorectal cancer liver metastasis; median tumour diameter 1·8 cm [1·5-2·5]). The interim analysis showed a mean minimal ablative margin of 2·2 mm (SD 2·8) in the control group and 5·9 mm (2·7) in the experimental group (p<0·0001), prompting halting of enrolment in the control group. A further 50 patients were enrolled to a non-randomised experimental group (mean age 56·5 [SD 11·7] years; 27 [54%] male and 23 [46%] female; 30 [60%] colorectal cancer liver metastasis; median tumour diameter 1·5 cm [IQR 1·3-2·2]); among these patients, the mean minimal ablative margin was 7·2 mm (SD 2·8). Grade 1-3 adverse events were reported in five (5%) of 100 patients: three (12%) of 26 in the control group and two (3%) of 74 in the experimental groups. No grade 4-5 adverse events or treatment-related deaths were reported.
interpretationSoftware-based assessment during CT-guided thermal ablation of liver tumours is safe and significantly improves the minimal ablative margin compared to visual assessment. Adoption of software-based assessment as a standard component of thermal ablation should be considered to achieve the intended minimal ablative margin.
fundingUS National Institutes of Health and US National Cancer Institute.
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.