[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"radiofrequency-ablation\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:radiofrequency-ablation":29},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,14,0,[8,43,72,94,114,140,163,183,215,235,261,292,314,339],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":15,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":18,"maxAge":19,"enrollmentInfo":20,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":24,"briefSummary":26,"conditions":27,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":32,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":33,"startDateStruct":36,"completionDateStruct":38,"leadSponsor":40,"locationsCount":4},"100634257","knee-osteoartritis-genicular-nerve-rf-ablation-vs-alcohol-neurolysis-100634257",false,"NCT07537335","Knee Osteoartritis Genicular Nerve RF Ablation vs Alcohol Neurolysis","Comparison of Genicular Nerve Radiofrequency Ablation and Neurolytic Alcohol Injection for Chronic Knee Osteoarthritis Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial","GEN-AL-RF","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Age: Patients aged 45 to 85 years.\n* Diagnosis: Chronic knee pain for at least 6 months diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria.\n* Radiological Grade: Grade 3 or 4 according to the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) classification.\n* Pain Severity: Baseline Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) score of 5 or higher.\n* Failure of Conservative Treatment: Inadequate response to conservative treatments (e.g., physical therapy, NSAIDs, or intra-articular injections) for at least 3 months.\n* Positive Diagnostic Block: At least 50% reduction in pain for minimum 24 hours following a prognostic genicular nerve block with local anesthetic.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Previous Surgery: History of knee arthroplasty or major knee surgery on the affected side.\n* Specific Conditions: Presence of inflammatory arthritis (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis), gouty arthritis, or active infection at the injection site.\n* Neurological Deficit: Severe neurological or psychiatric disorders that may interfere with pain assessment.\n* Coagulopathy: Uncontrolled bleeding disorders or use of anticoagulant therapy that cannot be temporarily discontinued.\n* Recent Injections: Intra-articular steroid or hyaluronic acid injection within the last 3 months.\n* Allergy: Known allergy to local anesthetics, contrast agents, or ethyl alcohol.\n* Pacemaker: Presence of a cardiac pacemaker or implanted electronic device (specifically for the RFA group).","ALL","45 Years","80 Years",{"count":21,"type":22},50,"ESTIMATED","INTERVENTIONAL",[25],"NA","The GEN-AL-RF study is a randomized controlled trial designed to compare the clinical efficacy of two interventional techniques for managing chronic knee pain due to osteoarthritis. The study focuses on genicular nerve radiofrequency (RF) ablation versus neurolytic alcohol injection for pain blockade.\n\nPatients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis are randomly assigned to either the RF ablation group or the neurolytic alcohol group. The primary objective is to evaluate the superiority and duration of analgesic effects between these two methods. Clinical outcomes are assessed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months post-procedure using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain intensity, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) for physical function, and the Short Form-12 (SF-12) for health-related quality of life.\n\nThe results of this study aim to provide high-quality evidence regarding the comparative effectiveness and long-term outcomes of genicular nerve RF and alcohol neurolysis in the clinical management of chronic knee osteoarthritis pain.",[28,29,30],"Knee Osteoarthristis","Radiofrequency Ablation","NEUROLYSIS","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2026-04-10",{"date":34,"type":35},"2026-04-17","ACTUAL",{"date":37,"type":22},"2026-05-01",{"date":39,"type":22},"2026-12-30",{"name":41,"class":42},"Sakarya University","OTHER",{"id":44,"slug":45,"hasResults":11,"nctId":46,"briefTitle":47,"officialTitle":48,"acronym":49,"eligibilityCriteria":50,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":52,"enrollmentInfo":53,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":56,"conditions":57,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":62,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":63,"startDateStruct":65,"completionDateStruct":67,"leadSponsor":69,"locationsCount":71},"100571134","effectiveness-of-radiofrequency-ablation-and-stabilization-in-metastatic-spine-lesions-by-positron-emission-computed-tomography-pet-ct-confirmation-100571134","NCT06716294","Effectiveness Of Radiofrequency Ablation And Stabilization In Metastatic Spine Lesions By Positron Emission Computed Tomography (PET-CT) Confirmation","Effectiveness Of Radiofrequency Ablation And Stabilization In Metastatic Spine Lesions By PET-CT Confirmation","ABLASPINE","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* only patients with secondary osteolytic and mixed (lytic and sclerotic) spine tumors with one to three active lesions will be enrolled.\n* lesions to be treated must be metabolically active on PET-CT performed during the last month.\n* Patients will be informed and sould sign an inform consent.\n* post treatment patients should submittes a new PET-CT in order to verify the activity of the treated area.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n\\-","18 Years","90 Years",{"count":54,"type":22},16,"OBSERVATIONAL","This pilot study will try to demonstrate metabolic changes in spine lesions treated by Augmentation and Ablation, according to existing standards of practice. Our purpose is to show the efficacy of a new radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in combination with augmentation, using a percutaneous ablation device (Osteocool-Medtronic) in the treatment of secondary vertebral bone tumor, avoiding concurrent bias related to other treatments of the disease.",[58,29,59,60],"Bone Cancer Metastatic","Spine Metastases","Vertebral Metastasis","RECRUITING","2026-04-06",{"date":64,"type":35},"2026-04-09",{"date":66,"type":35},"2023-01-01",{"date":68,"type":22},"2028-12-31",{"name":70,"class":42},"National and Kapodistrian University of Athens",1,{"id":73,"slug":74,"hasResults":11,"nctId":75,"briefTitle":76,"officialTitle":77,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":78,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":79,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":81,"conditions":82,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":85,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":86,"startDateStruct":88,"completionDateStruct":90,"leadSponsor":92,"locationsCount":71},"100602670","impact-of-rfa-on-esophageal-distensibility-and-mucosal-impedance-100602670","NCT07126535","Impact of RFA on Esophageal Distensibility and Mucosal Impedance","Assessment of Esophageal Distensibility and Mucosal Impedance in Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus Patients Undergoing Radiofrequency Ablation","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Male or female ≥ 18 years of age\n* Confirmed histologic diagnosis of BE with dysplasia or intramucosal carcinoma (IMCa)\n* Ability to take high-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (such as omeprazole 40 mg BID)\n* Willing to undergo multiple rounds of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) for management of BE (which is the guideline clinical recommendation for management of this disease)\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* History of esophageal ablation\n* History of esophageal stricture\n* History of esophageal or gastric surgery\n* Pregnancy\n* History of esophageal cancer treated with radiation or chemotherapy\n* History of achalasia\n* History of delayed gastric emptying confirmed by 4-hour gastric emptying study\n* Received injection of glucagon like peptide 1 agonists within a few days prior to EGD\n* Adults lacking the capacity to consent for self",{"count":80,"type":22},10,"Patients undergoing ablative therapy for management of dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus (BE) will have decreased distensibility over the course of treatment, but improvement in mucosal impedance as BE epithelia is replaced by neosquamous epithelia. This information may lead to further research in predicting therapeutic response and complications. The purpose of this research is to collect information while measuring changes related to the esophagus in patients that receive radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus (BE) or esophageal cancer. Study participation includes measurements of the esophagus with the use of two different devices. This takes place during clinically indicated upper endoscopies during the timeframe the participant is receiving RFA treatments. This process will take up to an additional 10 minutes during the upper endoscopy and be done while the participant is sedated.",[83,29,84],"Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus","Barrett Esophagus","2026-03-26",{"date":87,"type":35},"2026-03-30",{"date":89,"type":35},"2025-08-19",{"date":91,"type":22},"2027-07-31",{"name":93,"class":42},"Mayo Clinic",{"id":95,"slug":96,"hasResults":11,"nctId":97,"briefTitle":98,"officialTitle":98,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":99,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":100,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":101,"conditions":102,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":105,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":106,"startDateStruct":108,"completionDateStruct":110,"leadSponsor":112,"locationsCount":71},"100603764","radiofrequency-ablation-for-management-of-benignindeterminate-thyroid-nodules-and-low-risk-papillary-thyroid-cancers-100603764","NCT07140757","Radiofrequency Ablation for Management of Benign\u002FIndeterminate Thyroid Nodules and Low Risk Papillary Thyroid Cancers","Eligibility Criteria\n\n1. Participants scheduled to undergo ultrasound-guided RFA for the following conditions: benign thyroid nodules, indeterminate thyroid nodules, low-risk DTC, and recurrent PTC\n2. Participant is over 18 years and is either not a surgical candidate or has declined surgery.\n3. Capable and willing to provide written informed consent\n4. Participant has one of the following diagnoses:\n\n   * Biopsy-proven benign thyroid nodules causing compressive and\u002For cosmetic symptoms who are requesting treatment,\n   * Biopsy-proven indeterminate nodules (AUS or follicular neoplasm)\n   * Papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) without metastasis\n   * Locally recurrent thyroid cancer (\\\u003C 2 cm).\n\nExclusion Criteria\n\n1. Participants meeting any of the following criteria will be excluded:\n2. Participants considered unsuitable for RFA by the treating physician",{"count":21,"type":22},"To track the outcomes of patients who have been treated with RFA and its long-term effectiveness, and to learn more about the quality of life of patients who have received RFA in this study.",[103,104,29],"Low Risk","Papillary Thyroid Cancer","2026-03-10",{"date":107,"type":35},"2026-03-11",{"date":109,"type":35},"2025-08-18",{"date":111,"type":22},"2030-12-31",{"name":113,"class":42},"M.D. Anderson Cancer Center",{"id":115,"slug":116,"hasResults":11,"nctId":117,"briefTitle":118,"officialTitle":119,"acronym":120,"eligibilityCriteria":121,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":122,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":124,"conditions":125,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":131,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":132,"startDateStruct":134,"completionDateStruct":136,"leadSponsor":138,"locationsCount":71},"100613868","endoscopic-ultrasound-guided-radiofrequency-ablation-for-upper-gastrointestinal-tract-lesions-100613868","NCT07272187","Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Lesions","Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Lesions - a Prospective Study","EURAGIL","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with one or more lesions amendable to undergo EUS-RFA\n\n  * Insulinomas ≤ 25 mm confirmed by a 72-h fasting test, cross-sectional scanning, and a biopsy with low Ki67 index (\\\u003C10%)\n  * Non-functional pNEN lesions between 10-20 mm and growing, confirmed by a biopsy with low Ki67 index (\\\u003C10%), or larger pNEN lesions in patients who are not candidates for surgical treatment\n  * Unilateral APA with benign characteristics on non-contrast enhanced CT located in the left adrenal and confirmed lateralization on AVS\n\n    * Adult habile patients\n    * Signed informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Severe multimorbidity (ASA score ≥ IV or ECOG performance score ≥ 4)\n\n  * Uncorrected coagulopathy (INR \\>1.8 or thrombocyte count \\\u003C 50 mia\u002FL)\n  * Pregnancy\n  * Metastatic malignancy with expected remaining life expectancy \\\u003C 3 years\n  * Stenosis in upper GI tract or altered anatomy (e.g. previous gastrectomy) preventing the passage of an echoendoscope",{"count":123,"type":22},138,"The goal of this observational study is to evaluate the long-term clinical effectiveness of EUS-RFA and quality of life in patients with pancreatic or adrenal tumors recieving EUS-RFA.\n\nPrimary Objectives:\n\n* Clinical effectiveness: To evaluate the proportion of included patients who show doc-umented improvement in their clinical symptoms and biochemical parameters (blood test results) over time.\n* Patient satisfaction: To assess patient satisfaction with the procedure and subsequent disease-related quality of life, measured using validated questionnaires.\n\nSecondary Objectives:\n\n* Safety: To determine the proportion of treated patients who experience complications, as defined by the AGREE classification, within 30 days after the procedure.\n* Technical success: To assess the proportion of included patients in whom the EUS-RFA procedure can be successfully completed.\n\nExploratory Objectives:\n\n• To identify factors associated with adverse events and factors related to clinical success or lack there of.\n\nThe study is observational. All participant will receive EUS-RFA as part of their standard clinical care.\n\nParticipants will:\n\n* Undergo EUS-RFA, in which a fine needle is guided into the tumor using an endo-scope and ultrasound imaging. Radiofrequency energy is applied through the needle to heat and destroy tumor cells while protecting the surrounding tissue.\n* Have follow-up visits including blood tests, imaging scans, and clinical evaluations at regular intervals for up to 5 years after treatment.\n* Complete validated questionnaires about satisfaction and quality of life.\n\nThe study will include approximately 138 patients recruited between 2025 and 2035 from two Danish hospital departments (Herlev and Gentofte Hospital and Rigshospitalet). Data collection will continue until 2040 to assess long-term outcomes.\n\nThis study may help determine whether EUS-RFA can serve as a safe and effective alternative to traditional surgery for selected patients with small hormone-producing or benign tumors in the pancreas or adrenal glands, potentially reducing surgical risks and improving recovery and quality of life.",[126,127,128,29,129,130],"Insulinoma; Pancreas","MEN1","NETs","Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)","Conn Syndrome","2025-11-26",{"date":133,"type":35},"2025-12-09",{"date":135,"type":35},"2025-11-01",{"date":137,"type":22},"2041-12-31",{"name":139,"class":42},"Herlev Hospital",{"id":141,"slug":142,"hasResults":11,"nctId":143,"briefTitle":144,"officialTitle":145,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":146,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":19,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":147,"targetDuration":148,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":149,"conditions":150,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":154,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":155,"startDateStruct":157,"completionDateStruct":159,"leadSponsor":161,"locationsCount":71},"100610902","risks-and-benefits-of-radiofrequency-ablation-for-chronic-venous-insufficiency-ceap-c3-c6-in-patients-aged-80-and-over-100610902","NCT07233616","Risks and Benefits of Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Venous Insufficiency (CEAP C3-C6) in Patients Aged 80 and Over","Risks and Benefits of Radiofrequency Ablation for Chronic Venous Insufficiency (CEAP C3-C6) in Patients Aged 80 and Over: A Prospective Single-Arm Cohort Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Age: Aged 80 years or older.\n2. Clinical Diagnosis: Symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency of the lower extremity, with the highest clinical class (CEAP classification) being one of the following:\n\n   * C3: Venous edema\n   * C4a: Pigmentation or eczema\n   * C4b: Lipodermatosclerosis or atrophie blanche\n   * C5: Healed venous ulcer\n   * C6: Active venous ulcer\n3. Confirmed Reflux: Color duplex ultrasound examination confirming reflux (reflux time \\> 0.5 seconds) in the great saphenous vein (GSV) and\u002For small saphenous vein (SSV) of the target limb.\n4. Informed Consent: The patient or their legally authorized representative is able to understand and voluntarily provides written informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Participants who meet any of the following criteria will be excluded from the study:\n\n  1. Mobility: Non-ambulatory or bedridden.\n  2. Thrombosis: Presence of acute superficial thrombophlebitis of the target vein, or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the target limb.\n  3. Arterial Disease: Significant peripheral arterial disease, defined as an ankle-brachial index (ABI) \\\u003C 0.8 in the target limb.\n  4. Coagulopathy: Uncorrectable coagulation disorder.\n  5. Allergy: Known severe allergy to local anesthetics (e.g., lidocaine) or relevant device materials.\n  6. Cognition \\& Compliance: Severe cognitive impairment or psychiatric illness that, in the investigator's judgment, precludes adequate understanding and cooperation for the study procedures and follow-up.\n  7. Life Expectancy: Life expectancy of less than 1 year due to other comorbid conditions (e.g., terminal malignancy).\n  8. General Unsuitability: Any other condition that, in the opinion of the investigator, makes the patient unsuitable for participation in the study.",{"count":21,"type":22},"6 Months","The prevalence of severe chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) is significant in the growing octogenarian population. While radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard minimally invasive treatment, robust data on its outcomes and safety profiles specifically in patients aged 80 years and older remain scarce. This study aims to evaluate the risks and benefits of RFA in this specific, high-risk demographic.This prospective, single-arm, single-center cohort study will enroll 50 patients (initial target sample size) aged ≥80 years with CVI classified as CEAP C3 to C6 and with confirmed great or small saphenous vein reflux. All participants will undergo endovenous RFA under tumescent local anesthesia. The primary outcomes are: 1) the great\u002Fsmall saphenous vein occlusion rate at 6 months, assessed by duplex ultrasonography, and 2) the change in disease-specific quality of life from baseline to 6 months, measured by the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ). Secondary outcomes include occlusion rates at 1 and 3 months; complication rates (e.g., deep vein thrombosis, skin burns, paresthesia) within 30 days; and changes in the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) at predefined intervals over 6 months.This study is designed to demonstrate a high technical success rate (occlusion rate \\>95% at 6 months) and a statistically significant improvement in AVVQ and VCSS scores at 6 months post-procedure. The collected data will provide a detailed profile of complication rates, characterizing the safety of RFA in this very elderly cohort.This study will provide crucial, prospective evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of RFA for treating CVI in octogenarians. The findings are expected to guide clinical decision-making and inform treatment guidelines for this vulnerable and expanding patient population.",[151,29,152,153],"Chronic Venous Insufficiency, CVI","Octogenarians(Aged 80 and Over)","Cohort Study","2025-11-16",{"date":156,"type":35},"2025-11-18",{"date":158,"type":35},"2025-10-01",{"date":160,"type":22},"2026-09-01",{"name":162,"class":42},"Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine",{"id":164,"slug":165,"hasResults":11,"nctId":166,"briefTitle":167,"officialTitle":167,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":168,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":169,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":171,"conditions":172,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":176,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":177,"startDateStruct":179,"completionDateStruct":180,"leadSponsor":182,"locationsCount":4},"100608987","effect-of-oral-antiplatelet-or-anticoagulant-drugs-on-postoperative-bleeding-risk-and-venous-closure-rate-in-patients-with-lower-extremity-varicose-veins-after-radiofrequency-ablation-100608987","NCT07208695","Effect of Oral Antiplatelet or Anticoagulant Drugs on Postoperative Bleeding Risk and Venous Closure Rate in Patients With Lower Extremity Varicose Veins After Radiofrequency Ablation","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Aged 18 years or older, with a confirmed diagnosis of primary lower extremity varicose veins (CEAP classification C2-C6) based on clinical examination and duplex ultrasound.\n* Underwent endovenous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the great saphenous vein as the primary intervention.\n* Postoperatively, either: (a) continuously uses standard-dose oral antiplatelet drugs (e.g., aspirin 100mg\u002Fday, clopidogrel 75mg\u002Fday) or oral anticoagulant drugs (e.g., warfarin with INR maintained at 2.0-3.0, direct oral anticoagulants at standard therapeutic doses) as per clinical routine, or (b) does not use any antithrombotic drugs.\n* Able to understand and comply with the follow-up schedule (including 30-day bleeding assessment and 6-month duplex ultrasound examination) and provide informed consent.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Presence of secondary varicose veins caused by deep vein thrombosis, venous malformation, or other vascular disorders.\n* History of coagulation disorders (e.g., hemophilia, thrombocytopenia with platelet count \\\u003C100×10⁹\u002FL) or use of other antithrombotic agents (e.g., low-molecular-weight heparin, glycoprotein IIb\u002FIIIa inhibitors) postoperatively.\n* Major bleeding events (e.g., gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage) within 3 months prior to RFA.\n* Severe hepatic insufficiency (Child-Pugh class C), renal insufficiency (eGFR \\\u003C30 mL\u002Fmin\u002F1.73m²), or other life-threatening systemic diseases.\n* Unable to complete follow-up due to mental disorders, mobility limitations, or other reasons, or refusal to sign the informed consent form.",{"count":170,"type":22},40,"This observational study aims to assess the effect of oral antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs on key postoperative outcomes in patients with lower extremity varicose veins who have undergone radiofrequency ablation. Its main objectives are to determine the impact of these medications on postoperative 30-day bleeding risk and postoperative 3-month venous closure rate in this patient population. Researchers will compare three groups-patients receiving oral antiplatelet drugs, those receiving oral anticoagulant drugs, and those not receiving either type of drug-to identify differences in the two key outcomes. Participants will complete baseline data collection (including medical history, medication use, and lower extremity venous assessment) before or shortly after radiofrequency ablation, undergo 30-day postoperative follow-up to evaluate bleeding events (such as minor bleeding or major bleeding requiring medical intervention), receive venous ultrasound at 3 months postoperatively to measure venous closure rate, and report any medication changes or adverse events during the follow-up period.",[173,174,175,29],"Oral Antiplatele","Anticoagulant Drugs","Lower Extremity Varicose Veins","2025-09-28",{"date":178,"type":35},"2025-10-06",{"date":158,"type":22},{"date":181,"type":22},"2026-06-01",{"name":162,"class":42},{"id":184,"slug":185,"hasResults":11,"nctId":186,"briefTitle":187,"officialTitle":188,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":189,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":19,"enrollmentInfo":190,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":191,"briefSummary":192,"conditions":193,"keywords":198,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":206,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":207,"startDateStruct":209,"completionDateStruct":211,"leadSponsor":213,"locationsCount":71},"100602184","one-cause-of-heel-pain-is-plantar-fasciopathy-pf-in-most-cases-a-heel-spur-is-frequently-present-alongside-pf-we-aim-to-evaluate-the-efficacy-of-corticosteroid-injection-and-radiofrequency-ablation-along-with-tissue-elasticity-assessed-by-ultrasound-in-patients-with-chronic-pain-6-months-100602184","NCT07120204","One Cause of Heel Pain is Plantar Fasciopathy (PF). In Most Cases, a Heel Spur is Frequently Present Alongside PF. We Aim to Evaluate the Efficacy of Corticosteroid Injection and Radiofrequency Ablation, Along With Tissue Elasticity Assessed by Ultrasound, in Patients With Chronic Pain (≥6 Months).","Evaluation of Radiofrequency Thermocoagulation Versus Corticosteroid Injection in Patients With Chronic Calcaneal Spur Related Plantar Fasciopathy Using Elastography and Foot Function Index","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients with chronic (≥ 6 months) plantar fasciopathy\n2. NRS score ≥ 4\n3. Presence of a calcaneal spur detected by ultrasound (USG) or direct radiography\n4. At least one of the following treatments has been administered:\n\n   * Home exercise program\n   * Physiotherapy\n   * Orthosis\u002Fprosthesis\n   * NSAIDs\n   * Night splint\n   * Kinesio taping\n   * Corticosteroid injection\n   * Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT)\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. History of calcaneal trauma\u002Ffracture\n2. Previous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) treatment\n3. Patients with seronegative spondyloarthropathy\n4. Inflammatory or degenerative arthropathies\n5. Presence of diabetes\n6. Pregnancy\n7. History of cancer\n8. Peripheral neuropathy or ischemia\n9. Open wound or signs of infection at the procedure site\n10. Evidence of systemic infection\n11. Patients using anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents\n12. Presence of an intracardiac defibrillator or pacemaker\n13. Patients with tarsal tunnel syndrome\n14. Patients who have received ESWT and\u002For corticosteroid injection within the last 3 months\n15. Presence of heel pain due to lumbar radiculopathy",{"count":21,"type":22},[25],"Heel pain is common among adults. One cause of heel pain is plantar fasciopathy (PF). In most cases, a heel spur, a bony prominence that extends into the plantar fascia, is frequently present alongside PF. First-line treatments include pain-relieving drugs, home exercises, heel support peds, and physical therapy. However, some patients can't get relief from these therapies, and the pain persists beyond six months. This situation is referred to as refractory chronic PF. Local treatments applied via skin puncture such as anti-inflamtory injection and destruction of nerves carrying pain signals to brain are warranted in these cases. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroid injection and radiofrequency ablation, along with tissue elasticity assessed by ultrasound, in patients with chronic pain (≥6 months).\n\nThe goal of this clinical trial is to determine which treatment-corticosteroid injection or radiofrequency thermal thermocoagulation-is more effective for treating plantar fasciopathy in adults. It will also learn about the effects of the treatments on the properties of the heel tissue using ultrasound. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\nDo corticosteroid injections and radiofrequency thermal thermocoagulation have the same efficacy on pain and functionality for both short- and long-term? Do corticosteroid injections and radiofrequency thermal thermocoagulation similarly affect heel tissue? The researchers will investigate which of the corticosteroid injection and radiofrequency thermocoagulation is more effective for",[194,195,196,29,197],"Plantar Fasciopathy","Chronic Pain","Corticosteroid Injection","Elasticity Imaging Techniques",[199,200,201,202,203,204,205],"plantar fasciopathy","plantar fasciitis","randomized","radiofrequency thermal coagulation","RF","shear wave","elastography","2025-08-06",{"date":208,"type":35},"2025-08-13",{"date":210,"type":22},"2025-08-15",{"date":212,"type":22},"2026-08-15",{"name":214,"class":42},"TC Erciyes University",{"id":216,"slug":217,"hasResults":11,"nctId":218,"briefTitle":219,"officialTitle":219,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":220,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":221,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":222,"briefSummary":223,"conditions":224,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":227,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":228,"startDateStruct":230,"completionDateStruct":231,"leadSponsor":233,"locationsCount":4},"100581896","efficacy-of-mavacamten-combined-with-radiofrequency-ablation-in-patients-with-symptomatic-obstructive-hypertrophic-cardiomyopathy-100581896","NCT06856265","Efficacy of Mavacamten Combined With Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients With Symptomatic Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. At least 18 years old at screening.\n2. Body weight was greater than 45 kg at screening.\n3. Diagnosed with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) consistent with current American College of Cardiology Foundation\u002FAmerican Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology, and Chinese Society of Cardiology guidelines, ie, satisfy criteria below (criteria to be documented by the echocardiography core laboratory): A. Had unexplained left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy with nondilated ventricular chambers in the absence of other cardiac (eg, hypertension, aortic stenosis) or systemic disease and with maximal LV wall thickness ≥15 mm (or ≥13 mm with positive family history of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy), as determined by core laboratory interpretation, and B. Had left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) peak gradient ≥50 mm Hg during screening as assessed by echocardiography at rest or after Valsalva maneuver (confirmed by echocardiography core laboratory interpretation).\n4. Had documented LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥55% by echocardiography core laboratory read of screening TTE at rest.\n5. Had a valid measurement of Valsalva LVOT peak gradient at screening as determined by echocardiography core laboratory.\n6. Had New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II or III symptoms at screening.\n7. Had documented oxygen saturation at rest ≥90% at screening.\n8. Study participants were able to understand and comply with the study procedures, understand the risks involved in the study, and provided written informed consent according to national, local, and institutional guidelines before the first study-specific procedure.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* 1\\) Participated in a clinical trial in which the participant received any investigational drug (or was currently using an investigational device) within 30 days prior to screening, or at least 5 times the respective elimination half-life (if known), whichever was longer.\n\n  2\\) Known infiltrative or storage disorder causing cardiac hypertrophy that mimics oHCM, such as Fabry disease, amyloidosis, or Noonan syndrome with LV hypertrophy. 3) Had a history of syncope within 6 months prior to screening or sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia with exercise within 6 months prior to screening.\n\n  4\\) Had a history of resuscitated sudden cardiac arrest (at any time) or known history of appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) discharge for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia within 6 months prior to screening.\n\n  5\\) Had paroxysmal, intermittent atrial fibrillation with atrial fibrillation present per the investigator's evaluation of the participant's electrocardiogram (ECG) at the time of screening.\n\n  6\\) Had persistent or permanent atrial fibrillation not on anticoagulation for at least 4 weeks prior to screening and\u002For not adequately rate-controlled within 6 months prior to screening (note: participants with persistent or permanent atrial fibrillation who were anticoagulated and adequately rate-controlled were allowed).\n\n  7\\) Previously participated in a clinical study with mavacamten. 8) Hypersensitivity to any of the components of the mavacamten formulation. 9) Current treatment (within 14 days prior to screening) or planned treatment during the study with disopyramide, cibenzoline, or ranolazine. 10) Current treatment (within 14 days prior to screening) or planned treatment during the double blinded treatment with a combination of beta-blockers and verapamil or a combination of beta blockers and diltiazem.\n\n  11\\) For individuals on beta-blockers, verapamil, or diltiazem, any dose adjustment of that medication within14 days prior to screening or any anticipated change in treatment regimen using these medications during the treatment.\n\n  12\\) Had been successfully treated with invasive septal reduction (surgical myectomy or percutaneous alcohol septal ablation \\[ASA\\]) within 6 months prior to screening or planned to have either of these treatments during the study (note: individuals with an unsuccessful myectomy or percutaneous ASA procedure performed \\>6 months prior to screening were enrolled if study eligibility criteria for LVOT gradient criteria were met).\n\n  13\\) ICD placement within 2 months prior to screening or planned ICD placement during the study.\n\n  14\\) Had QTcF \\>500 msec when QRS interval \\\u003C120 msec or QTcF \\>520 msec when QRS ≥120 msec or any other ECG abnormality considered by the investigator to pose a risk to participant safety (eg, second-degree atrioventricular block type II).\n\n  15\\) Had documented obstructive coronary artery disease (\\>70% stenosis in 1 or more epicardial coronary arteries) or history of myocardial infarction.\n\n  16\\) Had known moderate or severe (as per investigator's judgment) aortic valve stenosis, constrictive pericarditis, or clinically significant congenital heart disease at screening.\n\n  17\\) Had any acute or serious comorbid condition (eg, major infection or hematologic, renal, metabolic, gastrointestinal, or endocrine dysfunction) that, in the judgment of the investigator, could lead to premature termination of study participation or interfere with the measurement or interpretation of the efficacy and safety assessments in the study.\n\n  18\\) Unable to comply with the study requirements, including the number of required visits to the clinical site.\n\n  19\\) Pregnant or lactating female.",{"count":170,"type":22},[25],"This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Mavacamten combined with radiofrequency ablation compared to Mavacamten alone in patients with symptomatic obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HOCM).\n\nParticipants were randomized into two groups:",[225,226,29],"Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy","Mavacamten","2025-02-26",{"date":229,"type":35},"2025-03-04",{"date":227,"type":22},{"date":232,"type":22},"2025-12-01",{"name":234,"class":42},"Shanghai Chest Hospital",{"id":236,"slug":237,"hasResults":11,"nctId":238,"briefTitle":239,"officialTitle":240,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":241,"healthyVolunteers":242,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":243,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":244,"conditions":245,"keywords":248,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":251,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":252,"startDateStruct":254,"completionDateStruct":256,"leadSponsor":258,"locationsCount":71},"100576947","effect-of-mechanical-ventilation-on-radiofrequency-ablation-in-atrial-fibrillation-100576947","NCT06791915","Effect of Mechanical Ventilation on Radiofrequency Ablation in Atrial Fibrillation","The Effect of Mechanical Ventilation on Radiofrequency Ablation in The Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Diagnosed with atrial fibrillation\n* planned to receive radiofrequency ablation treatment under general anesthesia\n* all patients over 18 years of age\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n\\- Patients undergoing ablation under sedation and\u002For local anesthesia",true,{"count":21,"type":22},"Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) is performed under general anesthesia. The success of the procedure depends on the safe contact of the catheter electrode with the myocardium. Movement of the catheter tip due to respiratory changes can result in inadequate lesion formation and AF recurrence.\n\nThe success of AF ablation depends on the adequacy of energy delivered to the myocardium and the durability of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Poor energy delivery and tissue heating during ablation are a major cause of procedural failure in RFA. To improve the success of the PVI procedure, efforts are underway to optimize catheter stability and contact force. However, catheter force and stability are influenced by respiration-induced thoracic motion, highlighting the importance of controlled breathing for further optimization. Fluoroscopy and ablation times during electroanatomic mapping-guided AF ablations improved with controlled mechanical ventilation. General anesthesia improved catheter contact.\n\nLow tidal volume, high respiratory rate (FCV), pressure controlled mechanical ventilation (PCV), volume controlled mechanical ventilation (VCV), pressure controlled volume assured mechanical ventilation (PRVC) can be used in investigators' hospital. The literature offers no definitive proof that one ablation procedure is superior to another.",[29,246,247],"Atrial Fibrillation","Mechanical Ventilation",[246,249,250],"Ablation","general anesthesia","2025-01-23",{"date":253,"type":35},"2025-01-24",{"date":255,"type":35},"2025-01-01",{"date":257,"type":22},"2025-08-01",{"name":259,"class":260},"Kocaeli City Hospital","OTHER_GOV",{"id":262,"slug":263,"hasResults":11,"nctId":264,"briefTitle":265,"officialTitle":266,"acronym":267,"eligibilityCriteria":268,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":19,"enrollmentInfo":269,"targetDuration":270,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":271,"conditions":272,"keywords":277,"overallStatus":31,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":284,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":285,"startDateStruct":286,"completionDateStruct":288,"leadSponsor":290,"locationsCount":4},"100576961","ga-68-dolacga-pet-scan-in-hcc-under-rfa-100576961","NCT06792097","Ga-68 Dolacga PET Scan in HCC Under RFA","The Role of Ga-68 Dolacga PET Scan in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Under Radiofrequency Ablation","HCC; RFA","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (BCLC stage 0 and stage A) eligible for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) treatment exhibit the following characteristics:\n\n  1. A single liver tumor, ≤ 2 cm, classified as BCLC stage 0 (very early stage).\n  2. Tumors ≤ 3 in number, each ≤ 3 cm, or a single tumor ≤ 5 cm, classified as BCLC stage A (early stage) liver cancer.\n  3. ECOG performance status of 0.\n  4. Age ≥ 18 years.\n\n     Exclusion Criteria:\n* Intermediate (BCLC B stage) and advanced (BCLC C stage) liver cancer patients:\n\n  1. A single tumor \\> 5 cm, or multiple tumors \\> 3 cm.\n  2. Diffuse hepatocellular carcinoma.\n  3. Vascular invasion (e.g., portal vein obstruction).\n  4. Extrahepatic tumor spread.\n* Early-stage liver cancer (BCLC A stage):\n\n  1. Contraindications for radiofrequency ablation (RFA).\n  2. Target lesions previously treated with local therapies, including surgical resection, percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), or liver transplantation.",{"count":80,"type":22},"2 Years","This study aims to investigate the use of Ga-68 Dolacga PET scan technology to assess treatment response and liver function changes in patients of early-stage liver cancer receiving RFA. The main questions it aims to answer are:\n\n1. How to assess treatment response and liver function changes in hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergo RFA via Ga-68 Dolacga PET scan?\n2. Compared with computed tomography (CT) scans, how effective is Ga-68 Dolacga PET scan for treatment response assessment?\n3. What is the correlation between Ga-68 Dolacga PET scan findings and patient treatment outcomes by tracking liver function and tumor recurrence after RFA?\n\nParticipants will:\n\n1. Undergo Ga-68 Dolacga PET scans and computed tomography before and one month after RFA treatment, followed by monitoring every three months thereafter.\n2. Total liver functional volume and residual liver functional volume are obtained from Ga-68 Dolacga PET scan",[273,29,274,275,276],"Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)","PET Scan","Computed Tomography","Deep Learning",[278,279,280,281,282,283],"Hepatocellular carcinoma","Radiofrequency ablation","Ga-68 Dolacga PET scan","Liver function","Neural network","Radiomics","2025-01-19",{"date":253,"type":35},{"date":287,"type":22},"2025-02-01",{"date":289,"type":22},"2026-12-31",{"name":291,"class":42},"National Taiwan University Hospital",{"id":293,"slug":294,"hasResults":11,"nctId":295,"briefTitle":296,"officialTitle":297,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":298,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":299,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":301,"briefSummary":302,"conditions":303,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":305,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":306,"startDateStruct":308,"completionDateStruct":310,"leadSponsor":312,"locationsCount":71},"100486141","concomitant-hybrid-versus-catheter-ablation-for-atrial-fibrillation-with-hypertrophic-cardiomyopathy-100486141","NCT05610215","Concomitant Hybrid Versus Catheter Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy","Concomitant Hybrid Versus Catheter Ablation for Reinforcing Therapeutic Effect of Atrial Fibrillation With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients' age is ≥18 y\n2. Clinically diagnosed hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (any left ventricular wall segment thickness ≥15 mm in genetical negative (or unknown genetical status) patients or ≥13mm in genetical positive ones-as measured by any imaging technique (echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography)-that is not explained solely by loading conditions)\n3. Non-obstructed left ventricular outflow obstruction with peak gradients \\\u003C30mmHg\n4. Concomitant with persistent atrial fibrillation (7 days\\\u003Csustained episode lasting\\\u003C3 years) with drug-refractory symptoms.\n5. Be able to understand the contents of the trial, and provide written informed consent to participate in this investigation.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients with left atrial size \\>60 mm (2-dimensional echocardiography, parasternal long-axis view)\n2. Contraindicated to systemic anticoagulation\n3. Left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%\n4. Concomitant with left atrium or left atrial appendage emboli\n5. Concomitant with a coronary or valvular disease that indicates intervention\n6. Ischaemic stroke within 2 months\n7. Previous ablation history\n8. Uncontrolled hyper\u002Fhypothyroidism\n9. End-staged kidney failure\n10. Concomitantly involved in other trials\n11. Pregnant or breastfeeding, or women of childbearing age not using a reliable contraceptive method\n12. Concomitant with bacteremia or at an active phase of infection\n13. Anatomically not suitable for thoracoscopic surgery(history of chest surgery or radiotherapy, etc.)\n14. Unwilling or unable to comply with all peri-ablation and follow-up requirements",{"count":300,"type":22},66,[25],"The goal of this clinical trial is to compare the rhythm control effect in hypertrophic non-obstructive patients with non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation by either concomitant catheter endocardial and thoracoscopic epicardial ablation or catheter ablation alone. The study aims to see if concomitant hybrid ablation can more effectively achieve rhythm control effect than catheter ablation alone in non-paroxysmal atrial fibrillation patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.",[246,304,29],"Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic","2024-08-28",{"date":307,"type":35},"2024-08-30",{"date":309,"type":35},"2023-02-11",{"date":311,"type":22},"2026-12",{"name":313,"class":260},"China National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases",{"id":315,"slug":316,"hasResults":11,"nctId":317,"briefTitle":318,"officialTitle":319,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":320,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":321,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":4,"briefSummary":323,"conditions":324,"keywords":326,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":330,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":331,"startDateStruct":333,"completionDateStruct":335,"leadSponsor":337,"locationsCount":71},"100515465","multifaceted-comparison-of-ultrasound-guided-ablation-and-laparoscopic-adrenalectomy-for-aldosterone-producing-adenoma-100515465","NCT05991856","Multifaceted Comparison of Ultrasound-guided Ablation and Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy for Aldosterone-producing Adenoma","Resident Doctor, Master Degree Candidate","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. APA was confirmed with unilateral lesions;\n2. Benign tumor without adrenal metastasis and endovascular tumor embolus;\n3. Receive ultrasound-guided adrenal RFA treatment or laparoscopic resection, and sign the informed consent for surgery;\n4. Age ≥ 18;\n5. Age ≥ 40 years old should meet the following criteria: blood potassium ≤3.5mmol\u002FL; PAC≥20ng\u002FdL; PRC≤5μIU\u002FmL; A unilateral adrenal nodule of 10mm or more was completely normal on the opposite side.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Bilateral adrenal diseases;\n2. Multiple adrenal tumors;\n3. Other adrenal diseases, such as adrenal hyperplasia, Cushing's syndrome, pheochromocytoma, etc.;\n4. Imaging suggests that the tumor may be difficult to reach;\n5. Imaging showed potential malignant adrenal tumor;\n6. Pregnant and\u002For planning a pregnancy;\n7. Refusing to participate in follow-up visits.",{"count":322,"type":22},45,"The purpose of this study is to retrospectively and prospectively analyze the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation and laparoscopic adrenalectomy in the treatment of aldosterone-producing adenoma (APA). It is planned to retrospectively collect 30 patients with adrenal radiofrequency ablation for APA and 15 patients with age - and sex-matched laparoscopic adrenalectomy for APA in our hospital from January 2020 to June 2024, and continue to follow up for 3 years.",[325,29],"Aldosterone-producing Adenoma",[327,328,329],"aldosterone-producing adenoma","radiofrequency ablation","laparoscopic adrenalectomy","2023-08-13",{"date":332,"type":35},"2023-08-15",{"date":334,"type":35},"2020-01-01",{"date":336,"type":22},"2030-12-01",{"name":338,"class":42},"Third Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University",{"id":340,"slug":341,"hasResults":11,"nctId":342,"briefTitle":343,"officialTitle":344,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":345,"healthyVolunteers":242,"sex":17,"minAge":51,"maxAge":346,"enrollmentInfo":347,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":349,"briefSummary":351,"conditions":352,"keywords":355,"overallStatus":61,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":359,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":360,"startDateStruct":362,"completionDateStruct":364,"leadSponsor":365,"locationsCount":71},"100374075","phase-2-rfa-plus-carrizumab-vs-carrizumab-alone-for-hcc-100374075","NCT04150744","RFA Plus Carrizumab vs Carrizumab Alone for HCC","Radiofrequency Ablation Plus Carrizumab vs Carrizumab Alone for Moderate or Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Real World Study","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Age from 18-75 years\n2. Diagnosis as hepatocellular carcinoma from histology and cytology\n3. BCLC B-C degree\n4. Score of ECOG PS: 0-2\n5. Child-Pugh Score: A or B\n6. Not suitable for resection or liver transplantation\n7. Have not received systemic therapy\n8. Have at least one evaluable target mass from CT or MRI according to mRECIST\n9. The estimated survival time ≥ 12 weeks\n10. Patients with HBV infection having HBV-DNA \\\u003C500IU\u002FmL and standard anti-virus treatment. Patients with HCV infection must receive standard anti-virus treatment.\n11. The function of main organs normal\n12. Sign informed consent\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Have cholangiocarcinoma, mixed type of hepatocarcinoma and fibrolamellar hepatocellular carcinoma. Have incurable malignant tumor in five years.\n2. Have local ablation, TACE or radiotherapy in 3 months before enrolled.\n3. Prepared to or have received organic or bone marrow transplantation.\n4. Uncontrollable ascites, hepatic encephalopathy or esophageal and gastric varices.\n5. Have hypertension and can't lower down to the normal level using blood pressure medication.\n6. Have type II myocardial ischemia or myocardial infarction, uncontrollable arrhythmia.\n7. Have diseases to influent the effect of oral drugs, for example, unable to swallow, chronic diarrhea and intestinal obstruction.\n8. Have gastrointestinal bleeding in 6 months\n9. Have abdominal fistula, gastrointestinal perforation or abdominal abscess\n10. Patients with lung fibrosis, interstitial pneumonia, pneumoconiosis, radiation pneumonitis, drug related pneumonia or severe dysfunction of lung.\n11. Routine urine test showed urinary protein ≥++ or the 24 hours amount of urinary protein ≥1.0 g\n12. Patients have autoimmune disease\n13. Patients need corticosteroid or other immunosuppressant therapy\n14. Patients have anti-tumor vaccine and other immunostimulate anti-tumor drugs in 3 months\n15. Allergy to monocloning antibody\n16. Pregnant or breastfeeding female Other patients not suitable to be enrolled in the study.","75 Years",{"count":348,"type":22},120,[350],"PHASE2","The study aims to find whether patients with advanced HCC can get more benefits from RFA +PD-1 immunosuppressant (carrizumab) compared with carrizumab alone, considering with the result of PFS.",[353,354,29],"Tumor Immunity","Immunosuppression",[356,357,358],"RFA","immunosuppressant","hepatocellular carcinoma","2020-07-06",{"date":361,"type":35},"2020-07-08",{"date":363,"type":22},"2020-08-01",{"date":39,"type":22},{"name":366,"class":42},"Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University"]