ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2026
Who is Afraid of the Gallbladder? Case Series of Unmitigated Pericholecystic Microwave Ablations of Liver Tumours with Pictorial Review.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fear Leads to Failure and Failure Leads to Fear.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThermal ablation of liver tumours is widely established. A location in vicinity of the gallbladder (GB) usually causes apprehension. Our intention was to gather data from our day-to-day practice to assess whether pericholecystic tumours can be ablated safely without protective measures. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective review of patient series undergoing microwave ablation of primary and secondary pericholecystic liver tumours (segments IVb-V) without hydro-pneumodissection between September 2018 and September 2025, in which the ablation zone encompassed the GB wall. Outcomes are technical success (> 5 mm safety margins), complication rate, hospital stay length, postoperative pain, modified gastrointestinal symptoms rating scale (mGSRS) score at 24h, rate of 30-day hospital readmission 3-, 6-, 12-month local tumour progression-free survival (LTPFS).
resultsForty-eight patients were included; 34 (70.8%) were males. Average age was 67 years (SD ± 10.2). Hepatocellular carcinoma was the most common diagnosis. Twenty-six (54.2%) procedures were performed on a single lesion near GB. Technical success was 100%. No severe complications were seen. Average pain score was 1.9 (SD ± 1.8; median 1, IQR 0.75-2.25), and mGSRS score was 8.6 (SD ± 5.8; median 7.5 IQR 4-11); average hospital stay length was 1.9 days (SD ± 2.3; median 1 day; IQR 1-2 days). Four patients (8.3%) required readmission: 1 (2.1%) due to delayed cholecystitis (treated conservatively) and 3 (6.3%) due to pain, but no additional intervention. 3-, 6-, 12-month LTPFS was 94%, 89% and 80%.
conclusionThe incidence of GB injury was low in this series, and the procedures were well tolerated. A protective hydro- or pneumodissection was found to be not essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41854892What 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.