Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Endoluminal radiofrequency ablation prior to stenting for malignant biliary obstruction: really time to say goodbye?
  1. Jia-Su Li1,
  2. Jun Fang2,
  3. Zhao-Shen Li1
  1. 1Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China
  2. 2Department of Gastroenterology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
  1. Correspondence to Dr Zhao-Shen Li, Department of Gastroenterology, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China;{at}; Dr Jun Fang, Department of Gastroenterology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan 430071, China; drmurphy{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Recently, Jarosova et al1 carried out a multicentre randomised trial to assess the impact of endoluminal radiofrequency ablation (RFA) plus stenting with stenting alone in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. The authors demonstrated that there was no benefit of endoluminal biliary RFA in patients with cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) and pancreatic cancer on survival or stent patency.

Their results were in agreement with the only Western randomised controlled study conducted by Albers et al.2 We notice that hilar CCA accounted for a large proportion (85.9%, 73/85) in CCA arm of the current study while distal biliary strictures accounted for 62.8% (54/86) in the latter study. We believe that the type of tumour and the location of the stenosis may have some impact on overall …

View Full Text


  • Contributors JF and Z-SL conceived and designed the study. J-SL wrote the draft. All authors: final approval of the letter.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.