Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 557

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Pulmonary Radiofrequency Ablation: Long-term Safety and Efficacy in 153 Patients

Simon, Caroline J., Dupuy, Damian E., DiPetrillo, Thomas A., Safran, Howard P., Grieco, C. Alexander, Ng, Thomas, Mayo-Smith, William W.·2007·Radiology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively evaluate long-term survival, local tumor progression, and complication rates for all percutaneous computed tomographic (CT)-guided lung tumor radiofrequency (RF) ablations performed at a tertiary care cancer hospital in patients who refused or who were not candidates for surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This HIPAA-compliant study was approved by the institutional review board; informed consent was waived. Between 1998 and 2005, 153 consecutive patients (mean age, 68.5 years; range, 17-94 years) with 189 primary or metastatic medically inoperable lung cancers underwent percutaneous fluoroscopic CT-guided RF ablation. Clinical outcomes were compiled on the basis of review of medical records, imaging follow-up reports, and any biopsy-proved residual or recurrent disease (when available). Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival and disease-free survival (progression) as a function of time since RF ablation. Comparisons between survival functions were performed by using the log-rank statistic; P < .05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. RESULTS: The overall 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival rates, respectively, for stage I non-small cell lung cancer were 78%, 57%, 36%, 27%, and 27%; rates for colorectal pulmonary metastasis were 87%, 78%, 57%, 57%, and 57%. The 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year local tumor progression-free rates, respectively, were 83%, 64%, 57%, 47%, and 47% for tumors 3 cm or smaller and 45%, 25%, 25%, 25%, and 25% for tumors larger than 3 cm. The difference between the survival curves associated with large (>3 cm) and small (< or =3 cm) tumors was significant (P < .002). The overall pneumothorax rate was 28.4% (52 of 183 ablation sessions), with a 9.8% (18 of 183 ablation sessions) chest tube insertion rate. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.9% (six of 153 patients), with a 2.6% (four of 153 patients) procedure-specific 30-day mortality rate. CONCLUSION: Lung RF ablation appears to be safe and linked with promising long-term survival and local tumor progression outcomes, especially given the patient population treated.

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.2431060088

Cites

9 of 9 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 9 references

Cited by

See all 557

Metadata

Authors
Simon, C. J., Dupuy, D. E., DiPetrillo, T. A., Safran, H. P., Grieco, C. A., Ng, T., & Mayo-Smith, W. W.
Venue
Radiology
Published
2007-04
Volume
243
Issue
1
Pages
268-275
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W1991625282
Cited by
557
References
9
FWCI
36.97
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: Pulmonary Radiofrequency Ablation: Long-term Safety and Efficacy in 153 Patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2431060088
The paper
Simon, C. J., Dupuy, D. E., DiPetrillo, T. A., Safran, H. P., Grieco, C. A., Ng, T., & Mayo-Smith, W. W. (2007). Pulmonary Radiofrequency Ablation: Long-term Safety and Efficacy in 153 Patients. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2431060088

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.