Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42435230›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2026

Improved detection of local tumor progression after ablation or resection of colorectal liver metastases using [

O D Bijlstra, S van Mossel, B Boekestijn, M C Burgmans, E L van Persijn van Meerten, D D D Rietbergen, S Shahbazi Feshtali, R J Swijnenburg, F H P van Velden, H Koffijberg and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

O D Bijlstra *Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands. o.d.bijlstra@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9069-500X
S van Mossel *Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
B BoekestijnDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
M C BurgmansDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
E L van Persijn van MeertenDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
D D D RietbergenDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
S Shahbazi FeshtaliDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
R J SwijnenburgDepartment of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam Cancer Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
F H P van VeldenDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
H KoffijbergHealth Technology and Services Research Department, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
L F de Geus-OeiDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
J S D MieogDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePost-treatment surveillance after locally treated colorectal liver metastases involves CEA measurement and contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) scans. However, reactive tissue around ablated lesions can appear similar to viable tumor tissue on CECT, complicating the detection of local tumor progression (LTP). Therefore, a new imaging protocol was initiated, which incorporates [ MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study analyzed a prospective cohort of patients undergoing thermal ablation or resection, who received CECT and [

resultsThe final analysis included 64 patients with 154 lesions. 37 patients underwent ablation, 14 patients underwent resection, and 13 patients underwent combination therapy, resulting in 93 (60%) lesions being treated with thermal ablation and 61 (40%) lesions with resection. Disease progression was found in 66% of patients, with LTP detected in 25% of treated lesions. Compared to CECT, [

conclusion[ KEY POINTS: Question: Interpreting CECT scans after local treatment of colorectal liver metastases can be challenging because reactive tissue around treated lesions can appear similar to viable tumor tissue.

findings[ CLINICAL RELEVANCE: [

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLiver NeoplasmsPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedAged, 80 and overContrast MediaDisease ProgressionFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsProspective StudiesRadiopharmaceuticalsContrast MediaFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals[18F]FDGAblationColorectal liver metastasesFollow-upLocal treatment

Identifiers

PMID42435230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.