Comparison of Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation for Subcapsular and Non-Subcapsular Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.
colorectal cancer liver metastases
complications
local tumor progression
minimal ablative margin
radiofrequency ablation
Journal
Frontiers in oncology
ISSN: 2234-943X
Titre abrégé: Front Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568867
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
09
03
2021
accepted:
27
04
2021
entrez:
31
5
2021
pubmed:
1
6
2021
medline:
1
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for subcapsular colorectal cancer liver metastases (CLMs). With the approval of the Institutional Review Board, the clinical data of CLM patients who underwent percutaneous RFA for the first time from August 2010 to August 2020 were continuously collected. All CLMs were divided into subcapsular and non-capsular groups. Baseline characteristic data, technical effectiveness, minimal ablative margin, complications, local tumor progression (LTP), and overall survival (OS) between the two groups were analyzed using the t-test or chi-square test. A Cox regression model was used to evaluate the prognostic factors of LTP. One hundred and ninety-nine patients (124 males; mean age, 60.2 years) with 402 CLMs (221 subcapsular; mean size, 16.0 mm) were enrolled in the study. Technical effectiveness was achieved in 93.5% (376/402) of CLMs, with a major complication rate of 5.5%. Compared with non-subcapsular tumors, the minimal ablative margin achieved in subcapsular CLM was smaller (χ RFA is a safe and effective technique for local tumor control of subcapsular CLMs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34055647
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.678490
pmc: PMC8160317
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
678490Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Fan, Wang, Qu, Lu, Xu, Wu, Xia, Zhang, Sun and Yang.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
BMC Cancer. 2018 Jan 15;18(1):78
pubmed: 29334918
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005 Apr;16(4):485-91
pubmed: 15802448
Ann Surg Oncol. 2004 Mar;11(3):281-9
pubmed: 14993023
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013 Feb;36(1):166-75
pubmed: 22535243
Int J Hyperthermia. 2021;38(1):263-272
pubmed: 33612046
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 Aug;24(8):1257-62
pubmed: 23885917
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003 Sep;14(9 Pt 2):S199-202
pubmed: 14514818
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2021 Apr;44(4):565-573
pubmed: 33388866
Hepatology. 2001 May;33(5):1124-9
pubmed: 11343240
Cancer Biol Med. 2019 Aug;16(3):542-555
pubmed: 31565483
Eur Radiol. 2020 Mar;30(3):1813-1821
pubmed: 31822975
Radiology. 2016 Jul;280(1):300-12
pubmed: 26824711
Cancer. 2003 Mar 1;97(5):1253-62
pubmed: 12599233
J Hepatol. 2010 Dec;53(6):1069-77
pubmed: 20832890
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Dec;17(12):755-772
pubmed: 32681074
Radiology. 2016 Feb;278(2):601-11
pubmed: 26267832
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Apr;190(4):1029-34
pubmed: 18356451
Nat Commun. 2019 Nov 28;10(1):5421
pubmed: 31780645
Eur J Radiol. 2011 Aug;79(2):196-200
pubmed: 20303686
Eur J Radiol. 2011 Feb;77(2):299-304
pubmed: 19733023
Surg Endosc. 2019 Jan;33(1):46-51
pubmed: 29872945
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Jan;190(1):91-8
pubmed: 18094298
Eur J Radiol. 2016 Apr;85(4):739-43
pubmed: 26971417
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021 May;46(5):2161-2172
pubmed: 33108496
Hepatology. 2006 May;43(5):1101-8
pubmed: 16628706
Radiology. 2008 Aug;248(2):670-9
pubmed: 18519740
Cancer Lett. 2018 May 1;421:73-81
pubmed: 29458142
CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 May;70(3):145-164
pubmed: 32133645
J Gastroenterol. 2003;38(10):977-81
pubmed: 14614605
J Gastroenterol. 2007 Apr;42(4):306-11
pubmed: 17464460
Radiology. 2021 Jan;298(1):212-218
pubmed: 33170105