Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,298

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Treatment of Focal Liver Tumors with Percutaneous Radio-frequency Ablation: Complications Encountered in a Multicenter Study

Livraghi, Tito, Solbiati, Luigi, Meloni, M. Franca, Gazelle, G. Scott, Halpern, Elkan F., Goldberg, S. Nahum·2003·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report complications encountered by members of a collaborative group who performed radio-frequency (RF) ablation in patients with focal liver cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Members of 41 Italian centers that were part of a collaborative group used a percutaneous internally cooled RF ablation technique and a standardized protocol for follow-up. They completed a questionnaire regarding number of deaths, presumed cause of death, and likelihood of its relationship to the RF procedure; number and types of major complications; and types of minor complications and side effects. Enrollment included 2,320 patients with 3,554 lesions (size, 3.1 cm +/- 1.1 [SD] in diameter): 1,610 had hepatocellular carcinoma with chronic liver disease; 693 had metastases, predominantly from colorectal cancer (n = 501); and 17 had cholangiocellular carcinoma. Number and characteristics of complications (ie, deaths and major and minor complications) attributed to the procedure were reported. Data were subsequently analyzed with analysis of variance to determine whether the major complication rate was related to tumor size, number of ablation sessions, or electrode type (single or cluster). RESULTS: In total, 3,554 lesions were treated. Six deaths (0.3%) were noted, including two caused by multiorgan failure following intestinal perforation; one case each of septic shock following Staphylococcus aureus-caused peritonitis, massive hemorrhage following tumor rupture, liver failure following stenosis of right bile duct; and one case of sudden death of unknown cause 3 days after the procedure. Fifty (2.2%) patients had additional major complications. The most frequent of these were peritoneal hemorrhage, neoplastic seeding, intrahepatic abscesses, and intestinal perforation. An increased number of RF sessions were related to a higher rate of major complications (P <.01), whereas the number of complications was not significantly different when tumor size or electrode type were compared. Minor complications were observed in less than 5% of patients. CONCLUSION: Results of this study confirm that RF ablation is a relatively low-risk procedure for the treatment of focal liver tumors.

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 · 10.1148/radiol.2262012198

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.

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

Cited by

See all 1,298

Metadata

Authors
Livraghi, T., Solbiati, L., Meloni, M. F., Gazelle, G. S., Halpern, E. F., & Goldberg, S. N.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2003-02
Volume
226
Issue
2
Pages
441-451
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2160455370
Cited by
1,298
References
0
FWCI
46.69
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: Treatment of Focal Liver Tumors with Percutaneous Radio-frequency Ablation: Complications Encountered in a Multicenter Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2262012198
The paper
Livraghi, T., Solbiati, L., Meloni, M. F., Gazelle, G. S., Halpern, E. F., & Goldberg, S. N. (2003). Treatment of Focal Liver Tumors with Percutaneous Radio-frequency Ablation: Complications Encountered in a Multicenter Study. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2262012198

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.