ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Endobiliary Radiofrequency Ablation in Cholangiocarcinoma: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.
Review in Journal of clinical 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) is an aggressive malignancy associated with malignant biliary obstruction and it has poor overall survival. Most patients present with unresectable disease which limits curative treatment options and highlights the need for effective palliative therapies. Endobiliary radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has emerged as a minimally invasive technique aimed at reducing intraductal tumor burden, improving biliary drainage, and potentially prolonging survival. Recently, multiple randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, and meta-analyses have evaluated the role of endobiliary RFA in patients with CCA, with mixed results. Available evidence suggests that RFA may provide a survival benefit in selected patients. However, its effects on stent patency and quality of life remain inconsistent across studies. Current data also demonstrate an overall acceptable safety profile. In this review, we summarize the procedural techniques, currently available evidence, adverse events, patient selection considerations, guideline recommendations, and future directions regarding the use of endobiliary RFA in CCA.
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.