ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Intra-procedural CT control versus ultrasound only in ultrasound-guided thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases: a single-centre cohort study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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.
- Results from the Pan-European CIEMAR study: Local Tumour Control After Microwave Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases and Exploratory Associations with Ablation Margins and Confirmation Software.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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLocal ablative treatment is increasingly used for small colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). Adequate ablative margins are essential for achieving local control, yet reported rates of local tumour progression (LTP) vary widely. This study compared LTP rate after ultrasound (US)-guided ablation of CRLM performed with versus without intraoperative CT control.
methodsAll percutaneous US-guided ablations for CRLM performed in a single centre from 2018 to 2021 were reviewed for LTP. Procedures with intraprocedural CT (CT group), allowing immediate re-ablation for margin extension, were compared with procedures without intraprocedural CT control (OR group).
resultsA total of 152 procedures in 137 patients were analysed. In the CT group, 5 LTP events (8.0%) occurred after 62 procedures, affecting 5 of 111 CRLM (4.5%). In the OR group, 20 LTP events (22.2%) occurred after 90 procedures, affecting 22 of 132 CRLM (16.6%) (procedure-based and lesion-based p = 0.0035 and p = 0.0255), respectively. For CRLM ≤ 10 mm visualized with US, LTP occurred in 1/50 lesions (2%) in the CT group and 0/51 lesions (0%) in the OR group (p = 0.495). Most LTP occurred with synchronous recurrence elsewhere in the liver (CT group 3/5 [60%], OR group 16/22 [73%]). Only minor complications, Accordion grades 1-2, were observed with similar frequency (8% vs. 12% in CT group and OR group, respectively).
conclusionIntraprocedural CT control was associated with substantially lower LTP, suggesting that CT control should be considered standard when available. US-only ablation may remain appropriate for small, clearly visualized lesions.
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.