Prognostic factors after ultrasound‐guided percutaneous ablation of colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Liver metastases from colorectal cancer are common and ablation therapy is a favourable treatment option for selected patients not suited for surgical resection. This study aimed to systematically review the literature and present prognostic factors associated with survival and local recurrence after percutaneous ultrasound-guided ablation treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review is reported according to the PRISMA. PubMed, Embase and Scopus were searched and records were independently screened by two authors, initially on title and abstract and subsequently on full-text basis. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. RESULTS: Of 2.882 records screened, 18 studies were included. The median survival was 23 months. One-year survival was median 95% and 3-year survival was median 58%. Complete ablation response and adjuvant chemotherapy produce considerably improved survival and low local recurrence rate outcomes. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous ultrasound-guided ablation technique for colorectal liver metastases provides impressive survival rates for patients not suited for surgical resection. However, there are some factors related to poorer prognosis, which may be considered when selecting patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".