Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Apr 15, 2013; 5(4): 71-80
Published online Apr 15, 2013. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v5.i4.71
Published online Apr 15, 2013. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v5.i4.71
RFA system | Electrodes | Generator power/frequency | Control system | Algorithm used to maximize volumes |
Boston scientific | 14 gauge, 10-12 tines, umbrella shaped | 200 W/460 kHz | Impedance controlled | Coaxial system |
Valleylab (radionics) | 17.5 gauge, single cooled needle or three cooled needles in triangular cluster | 200 W/480 kHz | Impedance controlled | Cool-tip |
RITA medical systems | 250 W/460 kHz | Temperature controlled | ||
Starburst XL | 14 gauge, 9 tines, Christmas tree shape max diameter 5 cm | Expandable | ||
Starburst XLi | 14 gauge, 9 tines, max diameter 7 cm | |||
Starburst Flex | 13 gauge, flexible | Expandable, wet electrode | ||
Berchtold | 18-14 gauge | 60 W/375 kHz | Impedance or temperature controlled | Wet electrode |
Table 2 Studies reporting survival after use of radiofrequency ablation for colorectal liver metastases
Ref. | Patients (tumors) n | Median tumor size (cm) | Extrahepatic disease | Chemotherapy | Method | % complete ablation | Local recurrence | Overall survival | |||
1 yr | 3 yr | 5 yr | |||||||||
Abdalla et al[26] | 57 (110) for RFA | 2.5 | No | NR | 0 | NR | 9% for RFA | NR | 37% for RFA43% for HR + RFA | NR | |
190 for HR | 5% for HR + RFA | 73% for HR | |||||||||
101 for RFA + HR | 2% for HR | ||||||||||
Siperstein et al[27] | 234 (665) | 3.9 (mean) | Yes | 80% before RFA | L | NR | NR | NR | 20%2 | 18%2 | |
Park et al[28] | 30 for RFA | 2.0 for RFA | No | 73% after RFA | P | NR | 23% for RFA | NR | NR | 19%2 for RF1 | |
59 for HR | 3.1 for HR | 81% after HR | 2% for HR | 48%2 for HR | |||||||
Abitabile et al[54] | 47 (147) | 2 | Yes | After RFA | O, P | 97% | 9% for overall | 88%1 | 57%1 | 21%1 | |
0%-5% for < 3 cm | |||||||||||
Gillams et al[55] | 167 (167) | 3.9 (mean) | Yes | 80% before RFA | P | NR | 14.00% | 99%1 | 58%1 | 30%1 | |
91%2 | 28%2 | 25%2 | |||||||||
Jakobs et al[56] | 68 (183) | 2.28 (mean) | No | 78% parallel or after | P | NR | 18.00% | 96%2 | 71%2 | ||
Machi et al[57] | 100 (507) | 3.0 (mean) | NR | O, L, P | 7% | 90% | 42% | 31% | |||
Schindera et al[58] | 14 (20) | 1.8 | No | NR | P | 89% | 15% | 72%2 | 60%2 | NR | |
White et al[59] | 30 (56) | 3.0 (0.8-7) | No | 36% before, 50% after | P | 89% | 17% | 75%2 | 45%2 | NR | |
Solbiati et al[60] | 117 (179) | 2.6 | Yes | 72% parallel | P | 98% | 39% | 93%2 | 46%2 | NR |
Table 3 Studies involving survival using radiofrequency ablation for primary lung tumors and metastases
Ref. | Patients (tumors) n | Mean tumor size (cm) | Tumor type | Median local progression free interval | Overall survival | Complications | ||
1 yr | 2 yr | 3 yr | ||||||
Ambrogi et al[1] | 54 (64) | 2.4 | 40 for NSCLC | < 3 cm - 15.8 mo | 72% for NSCLC1 | 46% for NSCLC1 | 30% for NSCLC1 | 6 for PTX |
24 for Mets | > 3 cm - 6.6 mo | 88% for Met1 | 72% for Mets1 | NR for Mets1 | 1 for chest wall hematoma | |||
Kim et al[30] | 8 for RFA | 3.66 for RFA | All stage I NSCLC | NR | 88% for RFA | 50% for RFA | 25% for RFA | 1 for PTX |
14 for SR | 3.99 for SR | 93% for SR | 77% for SR | 67% for SR | 4 for hemoptysis | |||
Simon et al[35] | 153 (189) | 2.7 | 75 for stage I NSCLC | < 3 cm - 45 mo | 78% for NSCLC | 57% for NSCLC1 | 36% for NSCLC1 | 18 for PTX |
57 for Mets | > 3 cm - 12 mo | 70% for Met | 54% for Mets1 | 44% for Mets1 | 5 for hemoptysis | |||
4 for death | ||||||||
Chua et al[37] | 148 | 4 | 108 for CRCM | 11 mo | NR | NR | 60% | 66 for PTX |
Other | 16 for pleural effusion | |||||||
40 for Mets | 1 for vleeding | |||||||
Lencioni et al[61] | 106 (183) | 3.5 | 33 for NSCLC | NR | 70% for NSCLC | 48% for NSCLC | 27 for PTX | |
73 for Mets | 89% for CRCM | 66% for CRCM | 4 for effusion | |||||
92% for Other | 64% for Other | |||||||
Yan et al[62] | 55 | 2.1 | All CRCM | NR | 85% | 64% | 46% | 16 for PTX/9 requiring drainage |
5 for hemoptysis | ||||||||
Hiraki et al[63] | 20 | 2.4 | All stage I NSCLC | 9 mo | 90% | 84% | 74% | 13 for PTX/1 requiring drainage |
Table 4 Studies involving survival using radiofrequency ablation for primary lung tumors and metastases
Ref. | Patients | Range tumor size (cm) | Mean tumor size (cm) | Complete coagulation necrosis n (%) | Resection | Assessment of cell viability | Complications |
Burak et al[38] | 10 | 0.8-1.6 | 1.2 | 9 (90) | Delayed | HE CK8/18 | None |
Singletary et al[40] | 29 | ≤ 2.0 | - | 25 (86) | Immediate | HE NADH-diaphorase | 1 skin burn |
Oura et al[41] | 52 | 0.5-2.0 | 1.3 | 52 (100) | Delayed | NR | 1 skin burn |
Khatri et al[64] | 15 | 0.8-1.5 | 1.28 | 13 (93) | Immediate | HE NADH-diaphorase | 2 skin puckering |
Noguchi et al[65] | 10 | 0.5-2.0 | 1.1 | 10 (100) | Immediate | HE NADH-diaphorase | None |
Fornage et al[66] | 20 | 0.6-2.0 | 1.2 | 21 (100) | Immediate | HE NADH-diaphorase | None |
Hayashi et al[67] | 22 | 0.5-2.6 | 0.9 (median) | 19 (86) | Delayed | HE NADH-diaphorase | 1 skin burn |
Izzo et al[68] | 26 | 0.7-3.0 | 1.8 | 25 (96) | Immediate | HE NADH-diaphorase | 1 skin burn |
Table 5 Studies involving survival after radiofrequency ablation for solid renal tumors
Ref. | Patients (tumors) n | Method | Mean tumor size (cm) | RCC | Complete first ablation | Recurrence free survival | Overall survival (yr) | Cancer specific survival (yr) | Complications | |||
1 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 5 | ||||||||
Tracy et al[69] | 208 (243) | P, L, O | 2.4 | 79% | 97% | 90% at 3 yr2 | 99%1 | 93%1 | 85% | 95% for RCC | 99% for RCC | NR |
Levinson et al[70] | 31 (34) | P, L | 2.1 | 58% | 91% | 80% at 5 yr2 | NR | NR | 63% for all358% for RCC4 | NR | 100% for all 100% for RCC | 4 for perinephric hematoma ; 1 for liver burn; 1 for death from pneumonia |
Zagoria et al[71] | 41 (48) | P | 2.6 | 100% | NR | 88% at 5 yr | NR | NR | 66% | NR | NR | 2 for pneumothorax no drainage; 2 for ureteral strictures |
Stern et al[72] | 40 | P, L | 2.4 | 81% | 97% | 91% at 3 yr2 | NR | NR | NR | 100% for RCC | NR | 2 for minor; 3 for major |
- Citation: Shah DR, Green S, Elliot A, McGahan JP, Khatri VP. Current oncologic applications of radiofrequency ablation therapies. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2013; 5(4): 71-80
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v5/i4/71.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v5.i4.71