| Title |
Safety and feasibility of endoscopic biliary radiofrequency ablation treatment of extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-015-4322-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Laquière, C. Boustière, S. Leblanc, G. Penaranda, E. Désilets, F. Prat |
| Abstract |
Biliary bipolar radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a new treatment for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) currently under evaluation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety, particularly biliary fistula occurrence, and the feasibility of biliary RFA in a homogeneous group of patients treated using the same RFA protocol. Twelve patients with inoperable or unresectable CCA were included in a bicentric case series study. After removal of biliary plastic stents, a radiofrequency treatment with a new bipolar probe (Habib™ EndoHBP(®)) was applied. The energy was delivered by a RFA generator (VIO(®) 200 D), supplying electrical energy at 350 kHz and 10 W for 90 s. At the end of the procedure, one or more biliary stents were left in place. Adverse events were assessed per-procedure and during follow-up visits. CCA was confirmed in all patients by histology (66 %), locoregional evolution or metastatic evolution. The types of CCA were Bismuth I stage (N = 4), Bismuth II stage (N = 3), Bismuth III stage (N = 2) and Bismuth IV stage (N = 3). No serious adverse events occurred within 30 days following endoscopic treatment: One patient had a sepsis due to bacterial translocation on day 1 and another had an acute cholangitis on day 12 due to early stent migration. No immediate or delayed biliary fistula was reported. The ergonomics of the probe made treatment easy in 100 % of cases. Mean survival was 12.3 months. Endoscopic radiofrequency treatment of inoperable CCA appears without major risks and is feasible. No major adverse events or biliary fistula were identified. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 27 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 24% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 24% |
| Unknown | 4 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 62% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2018.
All research outputs
#5,889,556
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#1,080
of 6,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,311
of 262,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#17
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,035 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,904 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.