Observational studyCardiovascular and interventional radiology2026
Safety and Efficacy of an Irreversible Electroporation System with Real-Time Electrical and Thermal Monitoring for Liver Tumors: A Bicentric Retrospective Study.
Observational study in Cardiovascular and interventional 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.
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
purposeTo assess the safety and efficacy of an irreversible electroporation (IRE) system integrating real-time electrical and thermal monitoring for liver tumor ablation. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis bicentric retrospective study included all consecutive patients treated with this device for primary or secondary liver tumors between April 2022 and August 2024. IRE was selected when surgery or thermal ablation was unsuitable. Patient, tumor and procedure characteristics-including voltage, amperage, interprobe distance, and maximal needle tip temperature-were recorded. Procedures were guided by CT, cone-beam CT or ultrasound. The protocol aimed for a "plateau-current" ≥30 A per needle pair while maintaining probe-tip temperature <50 °C near at-risk structures. Complications were classified using the CIRSE classification. Local tumor progression-free survival (LTPFS) was assessed by MRI every 3 months.
results27 patients with 31 liver tumors (15 primary, 16 metastatic; mean diameter 17.9 mm) were treated using 3-6 electrodes. No grade ≥3 complications occurred. Median follow-up was 18.4 months; 6- and 12-month LTPFS rates were 87% and 79%. Interprobe distance >20 mm was associated with recurrence (HR=5.64, p=0.017). Mean peak temperature was 53.3 °C. In cirrhotic livers, mean current was higher (38.9 A vs 32.1 A, p=0.004) and peak temperature lower (49.4 °C vs 56.0 °C, p=0.024).
conclusionThis IRE system appears feasible for liver tumors ineligible for thermal ablation, with a favorable preliminary safety profile and encouraging local control. Real-time electrical and thermal monitoring might be an interesting asset to achieve standardization of IRE procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42637830What 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.