Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ablative therapies for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review

Pathak, S., Jones, R., Tang, J. M. F., Parmar, C., Fenwick, S., Malik, H., Poston, G.·2011·Colorectal Disease

Abstract

Aim The standard treatment for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is surgical resection. Only 20–30% of patients are deemed suitable for surgery. Recently, much attention has focused on ablative therapies either to treat unresectable CRLM or to extend the margins of resectability. This review aims to assess the long‐term outcome and complication rates of various ablative therapies used in the management of CRLM. Method A literature search was performed of electronic databases including Medline, Cochrane Collaboration Library and the National Library of Medicine’s ClinicalTrials.gov. Inclusion criteria were ablation for CRLM with minimum 1 year follow‐up and > 10 patients, published between January 1994 and January 2010. Results In all, 226 potentially relevant studies were identified, of which 75 met the inclusion criteria. Cryotherapy (26 studies) had local recurrence rates of 12–39%, with mean 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year survival rates of 84%, 37% and 17%. The major complication rate ranged from 7% to 66%. Microwave ablation (13 studies) had a local recurrence rate of 5–13%, with a mean 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year survival of 73%, 30% and 16%, and a major complication rate ranging from 3% to 16%. Radiofrequency ablation (36 studies) had a local recurrence rate of 10–31%, with a mean 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year survival of 85%, 36% and 24%, with major complication rate ranging from 0% to 33%. Conclusion Ablative therapies offer significantly improved survival compared with palliative chemotherapy alone with 5‐year survival rates of 17–24%. Complication rates amongst commonly used techniques are low.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02695.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Pathak, S., Jones, R., Tang, J. M. F., Parmar, C., Fenwick, S., Malik, H., & Poston, G.
Venue
Colorectal Disease
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-08-17
Volume
13
Issue
9
Pages
e252-65
ISSN
  • 1462-8910 (ISSN-L)
  • 1463-1318
OpenAlex
W2163508427
Cited by
167
References
3
FWCI
1.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Ablative therapies for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02695.x
The paper
Pathak, S., Jones, R., Tang, J. M. F., Parmar, C., Fenwick, S., Malik, H., & Poston, G. (2011). Ablative therapies for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review. Colorectal Disease. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02695.x

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.