The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Radiofrequency Ablation and Microwave Ablation in Liver Tumors: An Update
Open accessAbstract
This article provides an overview of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) for treatment of primary liver tumors and hepatic metastasis. Only studies reporting RFA and MWA safety and efficacy on liver were retained. We found 40 clinical studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. RFA has become an established treatment modality because of its efficacy, reproducibility, low complication rates, and availability. MWA has several advantages over RFA, which may make it more attractive to treat hepatic tumors. According to the literature, the overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, disease-free survival, and mortality in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with RFA vary between 53.2 ± 3.0 months and 66 months, between 59.8% and 63.1%, between 2% and 10.5%, between 22.0 ± 2.6 months and 39 months, and between 0% and 1.2%, respectively. According to the literature, overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, disease-free survival, and mortality in patients with HCC treated with MWA (compared with RFA) vary between 22 months for focal lesion >3 cm (vs. 21 months) and 50 months for focal lesion ≤3 cm (vs. 27 months), between 5% (vs. 46.6%) and 17.8% (vs. 18.2%), between 2.2% (vs. 0%) and 61.5% (vs. 45.4%), between 14 months (vs. 10.5 months) and 22 months (vs. no data reported), and between 0% (vs. 0%) and 15% (vs. 36%), respectively. According to the literature, the overall survival, local recurrence, complication rates, and mortality in liver metastases patients treated with RFA (vs. MWA) are not statistically different for both the survival times from primary tumor diagnosis and survival times from ablation, between 10% (vs. 6%) and 35.7% (vs. 39.6), between 1.1% (vs. 3.1%) and 24% (vs. 27%), and between 0% (vs. 0%) and 2% (vs. 0.3%). MWA should be considered the technique of choice in selected patients, when the tumor is ≥3 cm in diameter or is close to large vessels, independent of its size. Implications for Practice: Although technical features of the radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are similar, the differences arise from the physical phenomenon used to generate heat. RFA has become an established treatment modality because of its efficacy, reproducibility, low complication rates, and availability. MWA has several advantages over RFA, which may make it more attractive than RFA to treat hepatic tumors. The benefits of MWA are an improved convection profile, higher constant intratumoral temperatures, faster ablation times, and the ability to use multiple probes to treat multiple lesions simultaneously. MWA should be considered the technique of choice when the tumor is ≥3 cm in diameter or is close to large vessels, independent of its size.
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
ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer
Van Cutsem, E., Cervantes, A., Adam, R., Sobrero, A., Van Krieken, J. H., Aderka, D., Aranda Aguilar, E., Bardelli, A., Benson, A., Bodoky, G., et al. (2016) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdw235 · Cited by 3,421
EASL–EORTC Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma
(2012) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2011.12.021 · Cited by 1,096
Goldberg, S. N., Gazelle, G. S., & Mueller, P. R. (2000) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.174.2.1740323 · Cited by 1,062
Microwave Ablation: Principles and Applications
Simon, C. J., Dupuy, D. E., & Mayo-Smith, W. W. (2005) · RadioGraphics · doi:10.1148/rg.25si055501 · Cited by 1,023
Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: 10-Year Outcome and Prognostic Factors
Shiina, S., Tateishi, R., Arano, T., Uchino, K., Enooku, K., Nakagawa, H., Asaoka, Y., Sato, T., Masuzaki, R., Kondo, Y., et al. (2012) · American Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.1038/ajg.2011.425 · Cited by 724
Mulier, S., Ni, Y., Jamart, J., Ruers, T., Marchal, G., & Michel, L. (2005) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000171032.99149.fe · Cited by 688
Brace, C. L. (2009) · Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology · doi:10.1067/j.cpradiol.2007.10.001 · Cited by 624
Image-guided Tumor Ablation: Standardization of Terminology and Reporting Criteria
Goldberg, S. N., Grassi, C. J., Cardella, J. F., Charboneau, J. W., Dodd, G. D., Dupuy, D. E., Gervais, D. A., Gillams, A. R., Kane, R. A., Lee, F. T., et al. (2009) · Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2009.04.011 · Cited by 519
Radiofrequency versus Microwave Ablation in a Hepatic Porcine Model
Wright, A. S., Sampson, L. A., WARNER, T. F. C. S., Mahvi, D. M., & Lee, F. T. (2005) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2361031249 · Cited by 493
Effect of Vessel Size on Creation of Hepatic Radiofrequency Lesions in Pigs
Lu, D., Raman, S. S., Vodopich, D. J., Wang, M., Sayre, J. A., & Lassman, C. (2002) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.178.1.1780047 · Cited by 458
Cited by
Glioblastoma Therapy: Past, Present and Future
Obrador, E., Moreno-Murciano, P., Oriol-Caballo, M., López-Blanch, R., Pineda, B., Gutiérrez-Arroyo, J., Loras, A., Gonzalez-Bonet, L., Martinez-Cadenas, C., Estrela, J., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms25052529 · Cited by 271
Rational Design of Biomaterials to Potentiate Cancer Thermal Therapy
Zhu, Y., Li, Q., Wang, C., Hao, Y., Yang, N., Chen, M., Ji, J., Feng, L., & Liu, Z. (2023) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.2c00822 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Izzo, F., Granata, V., Grassi, R., Fusco, R., Palaia, R., Delrio, P., Carrafiello, G., Azoulay, D., Petrillo, A., & Curley, S. A.
- Venue
- The Oncologist
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-06-19
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e990-e1005
- ISSN
- 1083-7159 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-490X
- OpenAlex
- W2952163200
- Cited by
- 578
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 28.74
- 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: Radiofrequency Ablation and Microwave Ablation in Liver Tumors: An Update. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0337
- The paper
- Izzo, F., Granata, V., Grassi, R., Fusco, R., Palaia, R., Delrio, P., Carrafiello, G., Azoulay, D., Petrillo, A., & Curley, S. A. (2019). Radiofrequency Ablation and Microwave Ablation in Liver Tumors: An Update. The Oncologist. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0337
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.