Case study: Pulsed electric field ablation for salvage prostate cancer ablation.

Katie Lattanzio, Khalid Alkhatib, Tom Guzzo, Daniel J Lee, Phil Pierorazio, Trinity Bivalacqua, Ben Schurhamer

Abstract readCase Reports

In one paragraph

Article in Urology case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Katie LattanzioDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Khalid AlkhatibDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Tom GuzzoDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Daniel J LeeDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Phil PierorazioDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Trinity BivalacquaDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Ben SchurhamerDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulsed Electric Field (PEF) ablation is an emerging non-thermal ablation device with previous uses in lung, liver and sarcoma cancers. We present a case of prostate cancer recurrence post-radiation managed with PEF ablation. Under transperineal guidance, targeted PEF was delivered to the area of concern on previous biopsies and PSMA. In follow up the patient had a marked decline in PSA levels and resolution on follow-up PSMA. The patient experienced no significant side effects, preserving urinary continence and sexual function. These outcomes underscore PEF ablation's potential as a safe and effective salvage therapy with minimal impact on quality of life.

Indexed as

AblationProstate cancerPSA reductionPulsed electric fieldsSalvage therapy

Identifiers

PMID40270519

DOI10.1016/j.eucr.2025.103023

PMCPMC12017871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC

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.