ArticleLa Radiologia medica2026
Technical and clinical outcomes of microwave ablation for HCC: a single-center retrospective analysis of percutaneous ultrasound-guided, intraoperative ultrasound-guided and CT hepatic arteriography-guided approaches.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare technical/clinical outcomes of microwave ablations (MWA) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) performed with percutaneous ultrasound (US)-guidance, intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS)-guidance or CT hepatic arteriography (CTHA)-guidance. MATERIALS &
methodsThis single-center retrospective study included 111 non-randomized patients (M:F = 91:20, median age 66y, range 51-86) with 200 HCCs (BCLC 0-A-B), treated with 136 MWA procedures (66 US-guided, 36 IOUS-guided, 34 CTHA-guided) between July 1, 2017, and January 31, 2025, with at least 6 months of clinical and CT/MRI follow-up. We evaluated patients' and nodules' characteristics, radicality (absent residual tumor at follow-up), local tumor progression, additional treatments, adverse events (CIRSE classification) and mortality. For patients undergoing multiple ablations, clinical outcomes were analyzed in relation to the first treatment.
resultsOne nodule was ablated in 94/136 (69.1%) procedures, 2 nodules in 25/136 (18.4%), > 3 in 17/136 (12.5%). We encountered 13 adverse events, with the highest severity in IOUS-guided MWAs (1 grade 3, 2 grade 6). Fifty-eight patients (52.3%) progressed in other segments, subsequent treatments were performed in 57/111 (51.3%) patients and 28/111 (25.2%) died during follow-up. IOUS-guided MWA was associated with the highest radicality rate (56/60, 93.3%, p = 0.04) compared to CTHA-guided (45/51, 88.2%) and US-guided (72/89, 80.9%) ablations. Treating multiple nodules increased complication risk (p = 0.003), impacting on radicality (p = 0.032). No differences were found for overall survival (p = 0.07) or progression-free survival (p = 0.584) among the techniques.
conclusionsIOUS-guidance for HCC ablation provided a higher radicality rate compared to CTHA- and ultrasound-guidance techniques, but carried a higher risk of severe complications.
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.