Skip to main content

Epidemiology: How to Appraise the Ablation Literature Critically

  • Chapter
Tumor Ablation
  • 2708 Accesses

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of ablation for hepatic tumors. ablation for hepatic tumors. METHODS: The medical records of patients with either primary or secondary hepatic tumors who underwent ablative procedures from February 1991 to May 2001 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. reviewed. One hundred nine patients with tumors ranging in size from 0. tumors ranging in size from 0.5 to 12cm in diameter were treated. in diameter were treated. The diagnoses were colorectal cancer (n = 69), hepatoma (n = 15), ovarian cancer (n = 8), cholangiocarcinoma (n = 4), carcinoid (n = 7), one each of leiomyosarcoma, testicular cancer, and endometrial cancer, and other tumors (n = 3). and other tumors (n = 3). Ablation was used to treat 90 tumors: 47 percutaneously, 23 laparoscopically, and 20 intraoperatively. and 20 intraoperatively. Additional tumors were identified by intraoperative ultrasound in 37% of the patients taken to surgery despite extensive preoperative imaging. despite extensive preoperative imaging. In 45%, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) was combined with resection or cryoablation or both. with resection or cryoablation or both. Alcohol ablation was performed on those patients who were found to have residual tumor after the initial ablative procedure. initial ablative procedure. Ten patients underwent a second procedure and three had a third for progressive or recurrent disease. for progressive or recurrent disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used in 19 cases, intrahepatic treatment in 10, and postoperative chemotherapy was given to 33 patients. chemotherapy was given to 33 patients. Followup ranged between 12 and 28 months.ranged between 12 and 28 months. RESULTS: If we exclude the six cases in which it was clearly impossible to destroy the liver tumors and the one death due to postprocedure myocardial infarction, median progression-free survival was 13 months. survival was 13 months. Tumor response was seen in 87% of cases. seen in 87% of cases. Median time to death or last follow-up was 18 months: 16 months for nonsurvivors, and 20 months for survivors. nonsurvivors, and 20 months for survivors. Complications occurred in 27% of patients and included one skin burn, one postoperative hemorrhage from hepatic parenchyma cracking, and two hepatic abscesses. Only 4. 7% locally recurred, although 37% have died of their cancer, and another 28% developed metastatic disease at other sites. at other sites. CONCLUSION: Ablation may be effective in allowing patients to undergo liver surgery and achieve better survival. surgery and achieve better survival.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baar J, Tannock IF. Analyzing the same data in two ways: a demonstration model to illustrate the reporting and misreporting of clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 1989;7:969–978.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Tandan VR, Harmantas A, Gallinger S. Long-term survival after hepatic cryosurgery versus surgical resection for metastatic colorectal carcinoma: a critical review of the literature. Canadian Journal of Surgery 1997;40:175–181.

    PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Moertel CG, Hanley JA. The effect of measuring error on the results of therapeutic trials in advanced cancer. Cancer 1976;38:388–394.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Warr D, McKinney S, Tannock IF. Influence of measurement error on assessment of response to anticancer chemotherapy: Proposal for new criteria of tumor response. J Clin Oncol 1984;2:1040–1046.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Marcus PM, Bergstralh EJ, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1308–1316.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Holmberg L, Bill-Axelson A, Helgesen F, et al. A randomized trial comparing radical prostatectomy with watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Eng J Med 2002;347:781–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Earle, C. (2005). Epidemiology: How to Appraise the Ablation Literature Critically. In: vanSonnenberg, E., McMullen, W.N., Solbiati, L., Livraghi, T., Müeller, P.R., Silverman, S.G. (eds) Tumor Ablation. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28674-8_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-28674-8_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-95539-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-28674-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics