The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative study of resection and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND We compared outcomes in patients with solitary colorectal liver metastases treated by either hepatic resection (HR) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHODS A retrospective analysis from a prospective database was performed on 67 consecutive patients with solitary colorectal liver metastases treated by either HR or RFA. RESULTS Forty-two patients underwent HR and 25 patients underwent RFA. The 5-year overall and local recurrence-free survival rates after HR (50.1% and 89.7%, respectively) were higher than after RFA (25.5% and 69.7%, respectively) (P = .0263 and .028, respectively). In small tumors less than 3 cm (n = 38), the 5-year survival rates between HR and RFA were similar, including overall (56.1% vs 55.4%, P = .451) and local recurrence-free (95.7% vs 85.6%, P = .304) survival rates. On multivariate analysis, tumor size, metastases treatment, and primary node status were significant prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS HR had better outcomes than RFA for recurrence and survival after treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases. However, in tumors smaller than 3 cm, RFA can be recommended as an alternative treatment to patients who are not candidates for surgery because the liver metastases is poorly located anatomically, the functional hepatic reserve after a resection would be insufficient, the patient's comorbidity inhibits a major surgery, or extrahepatic metastases are present.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Bevacizumab plus Irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Hurwitz, H., Fehrenbacher, L., Novotny, W., Cartwright, T., Hainsworth, J., Heim, W., Berlin, J., Baron, A., Griffing, S., Holmgren, E., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa032691 · Cited by 10,968
Douillard, J., Cunningham, D., Roth, A., Navarro, M., James, R., Karasek, P., Jandik, P., Iveson, T., Carmichael, J., Alakl, M., et al. (2000) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)02034-1 · Cited by 3,256
Cited by
Taylor, A., Primrose, Langeberg, W., Kelsh, Mowat, F., Alexander, D., Choti, M., Poston, G., & Kanas, G. (2012) · Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.2147/clep.s34285 · Cited by 657
Metadata
- Authors
- Hur, H., Ko, Y. T., Min, B. S., Kim, K. S., Choi, J. S., Sohn, S. K., Cho, C. H., Ko, H. K., Lee, J. T., & Kim, N. K.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Surgery
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-06
- Volume
- 197
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 728-736
- ISSN
- 0002-9610 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2169790053
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative study of resection and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.04.013
- The paper
- Hur, H., Ko, Y. T., Min, B. S., Kim, K. S., Choi, J. S., Sohn, S. K., Cho, C. H., Ko, H. K., Lee, J. T., & Kim, N. K. (2009). Comparative study of resection and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases. The American Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.04.013
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.