ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2026
Radiofrequency Ablation in the Treatment of Chronic Radiation Enteritis.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRadiation enteritis is the most common complication during radiotherapy for malignant tumors in the abdominal cavity, retroperitoneum, and pelvis. Bleeding is one of the common and severe complications in patients with radiation enteritis (Eur J Med Res 30(1):23, 2025). Endoscopic radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has emerged as a potential treatment, but data on its efficacy and safety are limited. This study conducted a retrospective analysis of the clinical data of patients with radiation enteritis whom we treated, aiming to evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of hemorrhagic chronic radiation proctopathy (CRP).
methodIn this single-center retrospective study, 18 patients with hemorrhagic CRP who underwent endoscopic RFA were included. Patient demographics, clinical variables, endoscopic features, and treatment outcomes were analyzed. Univariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with treatment failure, and multivariate analysis was not conducted due to the extremely low number of treatment failure events which would lead to statistically unreliable results and high overfitting risk.
resultThe cohort (median age 75 years; 72.2% female) had a median follow-up of 20 months (range: 3–67 months). Hemoglobin levels measured at 6 months post-treatment showed a statistically significant increase compared to pre-treatment levels. Based on the primary endpoint, treatment success was achieved in 15 out of 18 patients (83.3%). Among the 3 patients who did not meet the primary endpoint, 2 required additional endoscopic treatment and 1 continued to experience intermittent hematochezia despite endoscopic improvement. The mean endoscopic score improved from 3.44 to 1.06 (P < 0.001). Given the extremely small number of treatment failure events (n = 2, 11.1%), formal univariate statistical testing for failure-associated factors was not performed; instead, descriptive comparisons were conducted for clinical and endoscopic characteristics of the failed cases. No severe complications (e.g., perforation) occurred; mild to moderate anal pain was the most common adverse event.
conclusionIn this retrospective series, RFA for hemorrhagic CRP was associated with good tolerability, significant improvements in bleeding, hemoglobin levels, and endoscopic appearance, with a good safety profile over medium-term follow-up.
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.