TY - JOUR
T1 - Image-guided tumorablation
T2 - Standardization ofterminology and reporting criteria-A 10-year update
AU - Ahmed, Muneeb
AU - Solbiati, Luigi
AU - Brace, Christopher L.
AU - Breen, David J.
AU - Callstrom, Matthew R.
AU - Charboneau, J. William
AU - Chen, Min Hua
AU - Choi, Byung Ihn
AU - De Baère, Thierry
AU - Dodd, Gerald D.
AU - Dupuy, Damian E.
AU - Gervais, Debra A.
AU - Gianfelice, David
AU - Gillams, Alice R.
AU - Lee, Fred T.
AU - Leen, Edward
AU - Lencioni, Riccardo
AU - Littrup, Peter J.
AU - Livraghi, Tito
AU - Lu, David S.
AU - Mcgahan, John P.
AU - Meloni, Maria Franca
AU - Nikolic, Boris
AU - Pereira, Philippe L.
AU - Liang, Ping
AU - Rhim, Hyunchul
AU - Rose, Steven C.
AU - Salem, Riad
AU - Sofocleous, Constantinos T.
AU - Solomon, Stephen B.
AU - Soulen, Michael C.
AU - Tanaka, Masatoshi
AU - Vogl, Thomas J.
AU - Wood, Bradford J.
AU - Goldberg, S. Nahum
N1 - Funding Information:
Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:205–216. Li H, Guo Z, Si T, Wang H. EASL and mRECIST responses are independent predictors of survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with cryoablation. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 25:620–627. Shim JH, Lee HC, Kim SO, et al. Which response criteria best help predict survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma following chemoembolization? a validation study of old and new models. Radiology 2012; 262:708–718. Fong Y, Blumgart LH, Cohen AM. Surgical treatment of colorectal metastases to the liver. CA Cancer J Clin 1995; 45:50–62. Molmenti EP, Marsh JW, Dvorchik I, Oliver JH 3rd, Madariaga J, Iwatsuki S. Hepatobiliary malignancies: primary hepatic malignant neoplasms. Surg Clin North Am 1999; 79:43–57, viii. Tracy CR, Raman JD, Donnally C, Trimmer CK, Cadeddu JA. Durable oncologic outcomes after radiofrequency ablation: experience from treating 243 small renal masses over 7.5 years. Cancer 2010; 116:3135–3142. Hwang JE, Kim SH, Jin J, et al. Combination of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and systemic chemotherapy are effective treatment modalities for metachronous liver metastases from gastric cancer. Clin Exp Metastasis 2014; 31:25–32. Stangl DK, Berry DA. Meta-analysis in medicine and health policy. New York, NY: Dekker, 2000. Fisher B. Clinical trials for the evaluation of cancer therapy. Cancer 1984; 54:2609–2617. Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P, et al. Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. I. Introduction and design. Br J Cancer 1976; 34:585–612. Begg CB, McNeil BJ. Assessment of radiologic tests: control of bias and other design considerations. Radiology 1988; 167:565–569. Armitage P, Berry G. Statistical methods in medical research. Oxford, England: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1987. Rothmann M, Li N, Chen G, Chi GY, Temple R, Tsou HH. Design and analysis of non-inferiority mortality trials in oncology. Stat Med 2003; 22:239–264. Link RE, Permpongkosol S, Gupta A, Jarrett TW, Solomon SB, Kavoussi LR. Cost analysis of open, laparoscopic, and percutaneous treatment options for nephron-sparing surgery. J Endourol 2006; 20:782–789.
Publisher Copyright:
© RSNA, 2014.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84925365673&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84925365673&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jvir.2014.08.027
DO - 10.1016/j.jvir.2014.08.027
M3 - Article
C2 - 25442132
AN - SCOPUS:84925365673
SN - 1051-0443
VL - 25
SP - 1691-1705.e4
JO - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
JF - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
IS - 11
ER -