ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2025
Clinical study on ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Combined imaging and serum biomarkers in CEUS-guided microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for breast tumors: current status and future perspectives.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the efficacy, safety, and survival benefits of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation (MWA) compared to surgical resection (SR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsThis retrospective study included 100 patients with HCC who underwent either ultrasound-guided MWA (n = 58) or SR (n = 42). Baseline characteristics, liver function tests, tumor markers, complications, and survival outcomes were analyzed. Tumor response was assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, with follow-up evaluations at 12, 24, and 36 months.
resultsMWA demonstrated superior clinical outcomes compared to SR (P < 0.001). Post-treatment levels of liver enzymes (alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase) and total bilirubin. Both groups showed significant reductions in alpha-fetoprotein and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels, with no significant difference between them (both P < 0.001). The complication rate was significantly lower in the MWA group (P < 0.001). Tumor response, including complete response (CR) and overall response rate (ORR), was higher in the MWA group (CR: 40 vs. 20; ORR: 86.2% vs. 65.6%). Additionally, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 12, 24, and 36 months were significantly better in the MWA group (all P < 0.001).
conclusionUltrasound-guided MWA provides notable advantages over SR in the treatment of HCC, including less hepatic injury, fewer complications, and improved PFS and OS. These findings support MWA as a safe, minimally invasive, and effective alternative for HCC management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.