ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Case Report: Delayed appearance of the ablation margin after CT-guided microwave ablation of a solid pulmonary nodule.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During CT-guided thermal ablation of lung tumors, guidelines define the intraprocedural endpoint as a circumferential margin of increased attenuation extending 5-10 mm beyond the tumor. This criterion does not require the strict radiologic texture of ground-glass opacity. The timely appearance of this margin is the main real-time marker of an adequate treatment volume, and its absence is conventionally read as underablation, prompting additional energy delivery. We report a metastatic solid nodule in the left lower lobe treated with microwave ablation (45 W, 8 min total) via a single antenna, without repositioning. No such margin formed after three ablation cycles or after needle withdrawal, on a scan obtained 21 min after the first cycle and beyond the recommended 5- to 10-minute window; the only intraprocedural change was slight, non-circumferential enlargement of the solid-attenuation area. A well-defined margin with dense consolidation appeared only at 30.5 h; by 32 days, most consolidation had resorbed, forming a cavity. Despite adequate energy delivery, the guideline-defined margin in this solid nodule remained unconfirmed well beyond the standard observation window, and its absence should not be treated as an automatic indication for further ablation.
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.