ArticleKorean journal of radiology2026
Comparative Outcomes of No-Touch Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Tumor-Puncture Microwave Ablation for Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in Korean journal of radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Image-guided radiofrequency versus microwave ablation for small to medium hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- A dual-transformable MgGa-MOF nanoplatform for HCC therapy via lactate metabolism blockade and immune reactivation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the therapeutic outcomes of no-touch (NT) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs. tumor-puncture microwave ablation (MWA) in the treatment of single hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) measuring ≤3 cm. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study included 304 patients who underwent either NT-RFA (n = 144) or MWA (n = 160) for a single HCC measuring ≤3 cm. Comparative analyses were conducted for the overall cohort, while 81 patients per group were matched using propensity score matching (PSM). The analyzed outcomes included technical success, primary technique efficacy, local tumor progression (LTP), and major complications. Cumulative LTP was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and compared using the log-rank text, while the rate of ablative margin ≥5 mm and ablation time were compared using Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U tests, respectively.
resultsTechnical success was achieved in 98.6% (142/144) and 100% (160/160) of in the NT-RFA and MWA patients, respectively before PSM (
conclusionNT-RFA showed superior local tumor control compared to MWA, despite greater procedural complexity and longer ablation times.
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.