The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Minimal Ablative Margin of Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (> 2 and < 5 cm) Needed to Prevent Local Tumor Progression: 3D Quantitative Assessment Using CT Image Fusion
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to elucidate the minimal ablative margin for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (> 2 and < 5 cm) needed to prevent local tumor progression using CT image fusion and a 3D quantitative method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From April 2005 to March 2007, we performed percutaneous RFA for the treatment of 382 HCCs larger than 2 cm and smaller than 5 cm. A total of 110 tumors in 103 patients (77 men and 26 women; mean age, 59.7 years) that were previously untreated and were monitored for at least 1 year were retrospectively enrolled. A 5-mm safety margin was attempted in all cases, and a CT finding of complete replacement of the index tumor by RFA zone was defined as technical success. We constructed fusion images of CT images obtained before and after RFA and performed radial multiplanar reformation with the rotation axis at the center of the tumor to analyze the ablative margin quantitatively. Risk factors for local tumor progression (the thinnest ablative margin, tumor size, and the effect of hepatic vessels) were assessed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Patients underwent follow-up for 12.9-46.6 months (median, 28.1 months). The tumors were 2.1-4.8 cm (mean +/- SD, 2.7 +/- 0.6 cm) in diameter. The thinnest ablative margins ranged from 0 to 6 mm (1.0 +/- 1.4 mm). A 5-mm safety margin was achieved in only 2.7% (3/110) of cases. In 47.3% (52/110) of cases, vessel-induced indentation of the ablation zone contributed to the thinnest ablative margins. Local tumor progression was detected in 27.3% (30/110) of cases. Concordance between local tumor progression and the thinnest margin was observed in 83.3% (25/30) of cases. The incidence of concordant local tumor progression was 22.7% (25/110), 18.9% (10/53), 5.9% (2/34), and 0% (0/15) in tumors with the thinnest ablative margin of > or = 0, > or = 1, > or = 2, and > or = 3 mm, respectively. An insufficient ablative margin was the sole significant factor associated with local tumor progression. CONCLUSION: When the thickness of the ablative margin is evaluated by CT image fusion, a margin of 3 mm or more appears to be associated with a lower rate of local tumor progression after percutaneous RFA of HCC.
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
Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma *
Bruix, J., & Sherman, M. (2005) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.20933 · Cited by 5,857
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., Gillams, A. R., Kane, R. A., Lee, F. T., et al. (2005) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2353042205 · Cited by 1,193
Self-citationLivraghi, T., Meloni, F., Di Stasi, M., Rolle, E., Solbiati, L., Tinelli, C., & Rossi, S. (2008) · Hepatology · doi:10.1002/hep.21933 · Cited by 1,103
Lencioni, R., Cioni, D., Crocetti, L., Franchini, C., Pina, C. D., Lera, J., & Bartolozzi, C. (2005) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2343040350 · Cited by 867
Rohlfing, T., Maurer, C. R., Bluemke, D. A., & Jacobs, M. A. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2003.814791 · Cited by 445
Essential Techniques for Successful Radio-frequency Thermal Ablation of Malignant Hepatic Tumors
Rhim, H., Goldberg, S. N., Dodd, G. D., Solbiati, L., Lim, H. K., Tonolini, M., & Cho, O. K. (2001) · RadioGraphics · doi:10.1148/radiographics.21.suppl_1.g01oc11s17 · Cited by 390
Self-citationSignificance of Resection Margin in Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Critical Reappraisal
Poon, R. T.-P., Fan, S.-T., Ng, I. O.-L., & Wong, J. (2000) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/00000658-200004000-00014 · Cited by 357
Nakazawa, T., Kokubu, S., Shibuya, A., Ono, K., Watanabe, M., Hidaka, H., Tsuchihashi, T., & Saigenji, K. (2007) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.05.2079 · Cited by 345
Komorizono, Y., Oketani, M., Sako, K., Yamasaki, N., Shibatou, T., Maeda, M., Kohara, K., Shigenobu, S., Ishibashi, K., & Arima, T. (2003) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.11168 · Cited by 336
Choi, D., Lim, H. K., Rhim, H., Kim, Y.-S., Lee, W. J., Paik, S. W., Koh, K. C., Lee, J. H., Choi, M. S., & Yoo, B. C. (2007) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-006-0461-5 · Cited by 324
Self-citation
Cited by
Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatic Metastases: Factors Influencing Local Tumor Progression
Liu, C.-H., Yu, C.-Y., Chang, W.-C., Dai, M.-S., Hsiao, C.-W., & Chou, Y.-C. (2014) · Annals of Surgical Oncology · doi:10.1245/s10434-014-3738-y · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, Y.-S., Lee, W. J., Rhim, H., Lim, H. K., Choi, D., & Lee, J. Y.
- Venue
- American Journal of Roentgenology
- Publisher
- American Roentgen Ray Society
- Published
- 2010-09
- Volume
- 195
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 758-765
- ISSN
- 0002-9580 (ISSN-L)
- 0361-803X
- 1546-3141
- OpenAlex
- W1981198531
- Cited by
- 275
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 6.40
- 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: The Minimal Ablative Margin of Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (> 2 and < 5 cm) Needed to Prevent Local Tumor Progression: 3D Quantitative Assessment Using CT Image Fusion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2214/ajr.09.2954
- The paper
- Kim, Y.-S., Lee, W. J., Rhim, H., Lim, H. K., Choi, D., & Lee, J. Y. (2010). The Minimal Ablative Margin of Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (> 2 and < 5 cm) Needed to Prevent Local Tumor Progression: 3D Quantitative Assessment Using CT Image Fusion. American Journal of Roentgenology. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.09.2954
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.