Cochrane · systematic review · CD010163
Microwave coagulation for liver metastases
Storman, D, Swierz, MJ, Mitus, JW, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2024 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
22
current version
GRADE rated
9
No studies
11
Included studies
NR
No studies 11 · 50%Ungraded 2 · 9.1%Very low 9 · 40.9%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyMicrowave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation versus conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone
Population: people with liver metastases
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Time to mortality Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Health‐related quality of life Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Any adverse events or complications Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 50 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Disease‐free survival Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Failure to clear liver metastases Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Recurrence of liver metastases Microwave coagulation in addition to conventional transarterial chemoembolisation vs conventional transarterial chemoembolisation alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Microwave coagulation versus conventional surgery
Population: people with liver metastases
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 40 participants | Ungraded |
Time to mortality (overall survival) Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | HR 0.91 [0.39, 2.15] | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health‐related quality of life Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Any adverse events or complications Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Disease‐free survival Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Failure to clear liver metastases Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Recurrence of liver metastases Microwave coagulation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Microwave coagulation versus radiofrequency ablation
Population: people with liver metastases
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | RR 0.62 [0.26, 1.47] | 1 study · 50 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Time to mortality (overall survival) Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | HR 0.63 [0.23, 1.73] | 1 study · 50 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health‐related quality of life Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Any adverse events or complications Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | RR 0.19 [0.01, 3.67] | 1 study · 50 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Disease‐free survival Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Failure to clear liver metastases Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 50 participants | Ungraded |
Recurrence of liver metastases local progression Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | RR 0.19 [0.01, 3.67] | 1 study · 50 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Recurrence of liver metastases distant recurrence Microwave coagulation vs radiofrequency ablation | RR 1.03 [0.5, 2.08] | 1 study · 50 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Microwave coagulation vs no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments
Population: participants with liver metastases
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Time to mortality Microwave coagulation vs no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Disease‐free interval Microwave coagulation vs no intervention, other ablation methods, or systemic treatments | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |