Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore · 2025
The efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation in papillary thyroid carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cheong Wei Shuen Clarissa, Au Xin Yi Joy, Lim Ming Yann, Fu Ernest Weizhong, Li Hao, Pua Uei, Soon Yong Quan Alvin, Gan Yijin Jereme
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) avoids the complications of general anaesthesia, reduces length of hospitalisation and reduces morbidity from surgery. As such, it is a strong alternative treatment for patients with comorbidities who are not surgical candidates. However, to our knowledge, there have only been 1 systematic review and 3 combined systematic review and meta-analyses on this topic to date. This systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the efficacy and safety of RFA in the treatment of papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) with longer follow-up durations.
METHOD: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant studies published from 1990 to 2021; 13 studies with a total of 1366 patients were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Sandelowski et al.'s approach1 to "negotiated consensual validation" were used to achieve consensus on the final list of articles to be included. All authors then assessed each study using a rating scheme modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.
RESULTS: Pooled volume reduction rates (VRRs) from 1 to 48 months after RFA, complete disappearance rates (CDR) and complications were assessed. Pooled mean VRRs were 96.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.05-102.13, I2=0%) at 12 months2-6 and 99.31 (95% CI 93.74-104.88, I2=not applicable) at 48 months.2,5 Five studies showed an eventual CDR of 100%.2,4,7-9 No life-threatening complications were recorded. The most common complications included pain, transient voice hoarseness, fever and less commonly, first-degree burn.
CONCLUSION: RFA may be an effective and safe alternative to treating PTC. Larger clinical trials with longer follow-up are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness of RFA in treating PTC.
METHOD: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant studies published from 1990 to 2021; 13 studies with a total of 1366 patients were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and Sandelowski et al.'s approach1 to "negotiated consensual validation" were used to achieve consensus on the final list of articles to be included. All authors then assessed each study using a rating scheme modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.
RESULTS: Pooled volume reduction rates (VRRs) from 1 to 48 months after RFA, complete disappearance rates (CDR) and complications were assessed. Pooled mean VRRs were 96.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.05-102.13, I2=0%) at 12 months2-6 and 99.31 (95% CI 93.74-104.88, I2=not applicable) at 48 months.2,5 Five studies showed an eventual CDR of 100%.2,4,7-9 No life-threatening complications were recorded. The most common complications included pain, transient voice hoarseness, fever and less commonly, first-degree burn.
CONCLUSION: RFA may be an effective and safe alternative to treating PTC. Larger clinical trials with longer follow-up are needed to further evaluate the effectiveness of RFA in treating PTC.