Results of this study confirm that RF ablation is a relatively low-risk procedure for the treatment of focal liver tumors.

RF ablation results in a higher rate of complete necrosis and requires fewer treatment sessions than percutaneous ethanol injection. However, the complication rate is higher with RF ablation than with percutaneous ethanol injection. RF ablation is the treatment of choice for most patients with HCC.

If liver transplantation is not feasible, partial resection is considered the treatment of choice for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis. However, in some centers the firstline treatment for small, single, operable HCC is now radiofrequency ablation (RFA). In the current study, 218 patients with single HCC < 2.0 cm (very early or T1 stage) underwent RFA. We assessed 2 primary end points that could be easily compared with those reported for resective surgery: (1) the rate of sustained, local, complete response and (2) the rate of treatment-related complications. The secondary end point was 5-year survival in the 100 patients whose tumors had been considered potentially operable. After a median follow-up of 31 months, sustained complete response was observed in 216 patients (97.2%). In the remaining 6, percutaneous ethanol injection, selective intraarterial chemoembolization, or resection were used as salvage therapy. Perioperative mortality, major complication, and 5-year survival rates were 0%, 1.8%, and 68.5%, respectively. Conclusion: Compared with resection, RFA is less invasive and associated with lower complication rate and lower costs. RFA is also just as effective for ensuring local control of stage T1 HCC, and it is associated with similar survival rates (as recently demonstrated by 2 randomized trials). These data indicate that RFA can be considered the treatment of choice for patients with single HCC < 2.0 cm, even when surgical resection is possible. Other approaches can be used as salvage therapy for the few cases in which RFA is unsuccessful or unfeasible. ( on the oncological assumption that resection is the more suitable option for obtaining the complete tumor ablation including a layer of tissue surrounding it. 2,3 The importance of the local complete response (in other words, the absence of residual neoplastic tissue at the site of the tumor) on the overall survival in patients with HCC had been proved not only for surgery but also for percutaneous ablation therapies (PATs). 4,5 PATs were originally reserved for HCCs that were, for one reason or another, unsuitable for resective surgery, but they are now proving their worth in small operable cases as well. 6,7 Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is currently considered the most effective PAT, [8][9][10][11] and 2 recent randomized trials failed to reveal significant differences between the survival rates associated with resective surgery and RFA in patients with early HCC. 12,13 These considerations have led some centers to adopt RFA as first-line treatment for single HCC nodules less than 3.0 cm in diameter, [14][15][16][17] opening the debate over the best therapeutic option for these small tumors.To clarify this issue, we conducted a multicenter study that included a consecutive series of patients with single HCC 2.0 cm or less in diameter accompanying cirrhosis

No abstract

Image-guided tumor ablation has become a well-established hallmark of local cancer therapy. The breadth of options available in this growing field increases the need for standardization of terminology and reporting criteria to facilitate effective communication of ideas and appropriate comparison among treatments that use different technologies, such as chemical (eg, ethanol or acetic acid) ablation, thermal therapies (eg, radiofrequency, laser, microwave, focused ultrasound, and cryoablation) and newer ablative modalities such as irreversible electroporation. This updated consensus document provides a framework that will facilitate the clearest communication among investigators regarding ablative technologies. An appropriate vehicle is proposed for reporting the various aspects of image-guided ablation therapy including classification of therapies, procedure terms, descriptors of imaging guidance, and terminology for imaging and pathologic findings. Methods are addressed for standardizing reporting of technique, follow-up, complications, and clinical results. As noted in the original document from 2003, adherence to the recommendations will improve the precision of communications in this field, leading to more accurate comparison of technologies and results, and ultimately to improved patient outcomes.