Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
about
No-touch radiofrequency ablation using multiple electrodes: An in vivo comparison study of switching monopolar versus switching bipolar modes in porcine liversNo-Touch Radiofrequency Ablation: A Comparison of Switching Bipolar and Switching Monopolar Ablation in Ex Vivo Bovine LiverRadiofrequency ablation using a 10-mm target margin for small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with liver cirrhosis: A prospective randomized trial.Aggressive tumor recurrence after radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.RE: Should We Use a Monopolar or Bipolar Mode for Performing No-Touch Radiofrequency Ablation of Liver Tumors? Clinical Practice Might have Already Resolved the Matter Once and for AllTransarterial chemoembolization for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma decrease local tumor control and overall survival compared to radiofrequency ablation.Comparison of switching bipolar ablation with multiple cooled wet electrodes and switching monopolar ablation with separable clustered electrode in treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomized controlled trial.Radiofrequency ablation using a multiple-electrode switching system for hepatocellular carcinoma within the Milan criteria: long-term results.Potential of a no-touch pincer ablation procedure that uses a multipolar radiofrequency ablation system to prevent intrasubsegmental recurrence of small and single hepatocellular carcinomas.Written reply: "Optimal multibipolar radiofrequency parameters should overcome heat-sink effect".Recent Advances in the Image-Guided Tumor Ablation of Liver Malignancies: Radiofrequency Ablation with Multiple Electrodes, Real-Time Multimodality Fusion Imaging, and New Energy Sources.No-Touch Radiofrequency Ablation of VX2 Hepatic Tumors in Rabbits: A Proof of Concept StudyPercutaneous ablation for HCC eligible to transplantation: providing more opportunities of remission in the context of graft shortage
P2860
Q33605872-9F626936-9B79-4EC4-9BF9-6DFFE0C7CAC7Q37647697-F8E3F4C9-4D64-42F8-92C0-5FBB8C8D79FDQ40277875-158E0673-24CE-45D9-87A0-2E01CFB0B363Q41911314-11512A19-0849-476F-A0D1-EF176EA7DFE4Q41988009-D7BB02C0-C803-4B5B-B31E-07739847D8B4Q42000270-2B3430DC-C722-42A1-B3C8-4C6828D51853Q50053599-3CDCBE83-2856-4EF9-8249-663C92063E7CQ50616972-0FF1B6DF-2CDF-4465-8B25-AD969B494187Q51097786-A845C1C2-BF20-49D2-B832-867264DF826BQ52847875-1C4609F9-E2F7-4245-BB36-4B08B29B4A28Q55349038-418D1035-6AB1-4EF2-AE6E-64D50A5C2966Q58565375-9C3D6149-DBA5-4236-AAFD-FEF177F44F42Q58804385-7EE5E01E-23FB-4234-8384-0CAACF3F4866
P2860
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
description
2016 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2016年の論文
@ja
2016年学术文章
@wuu
2016年学术文章
@zh
2016年学术文章
@zh-cn
2016年学术文章
@zh-hans
2016年学术文章
@zh-my
2016年学术文章
@zh-sg
2016年學術文章
@yue
2016年學術文章
@zh-hant
name
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
@en
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
@nl
type
label
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
@en
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
@nl
prefLabel
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
@en
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC.
@nl
P2093
P1476
Comparison of no-touch multi-bipolar vs. monopolar radiofrequency ablation for small HCC
@en
P2093
Agnès Rode
Anne Frederique Manichon
Christophe Aubé
Gisèle N'kontchou
Hervé Trillaud
Jean-Frédéric Blanc
Jérome Boursier
Olivier Sutter
Philippe Merle
Victoire Cartier
P356
10.1016/J.JHEP.2016.07.010
P577
2016-07-13T00:00:00Z