ArticleJMIR cancer2026
Co-Ablation System for Pain Management in Bone Metastases: Retrospective Exploratory Study.
Article in JMIR cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBone metastasis is a prevalent complication of malignant tumors, often resulting in restricted mobility, severe pain, and diminished quality of life.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the analgesic effect and safety of a co-ablation system that combines elements of hyperthermic ablation and cryoablation in patients with bone metastases.
methodsThis retrospective study included patients with histologically confirmed painful bone metastases treated with the co-ablation system between January and October 2024. Pain intensity was assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS), and functional status was evaluated using the Karnofsky Performance Status score at baseline and during a 12-week follow-up. Technical success, adverse events, analgesic use, and pain response (defined as a ≥2-point reduction in NRS) were analyzed.
resultsNine patients were included. Technical success was achieved in all procedures, with no procedure-related adverse events observed. Median NRS scores decreased progressively from 5 (IQR 4-6) at baseline to 2 (IQR 1-3) at 12 weeks. By the fourth week, 8 (88.9%) patients achieved a clinically meaningful pain reduction. Karnofsky Performance Status scores showed gradual improvement during follow-up. No patients required escalation of analgesic therapy, and some experienced dose reductions.
conclusionsThe co-ablation system appeared to be feasible and was associated with short-term pain reduction in patients with bone metastases, with no ablation-related adverse events observed.
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.