Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Rates and Patterns of Recurrence After Microwave Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Per Lesion Analysis of 416 Tumors in the Era of 2.45 GHz Generators

  • Hepatobiliary Tumors
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

For some patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), surgical resection of all visible disease can lead to long-term survival and even cure. When complete resection is not feasible, microwave ablation (MWA) can help achieve hepatic disease control. As modern 2.45-GHz MWA generators gain popularity, the characteristics of tumors most likely to benefit from this method remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate local recurrence (LR) rates, patterns of recurrence, and factors contributing to treatment failure after 2.45-GHz MWA of CRLM.

Methods

Patients with CRLM who underwent operative 2.45-GHz MWA between 2011 and 2019 were identified in a prospectively maintained single-institution database. Recurrence outcomes were ascertained for each lesion by imaging review. Factors associated with LR were analyzed.

Results

The study enrolled 184 patients bearing 416 ablated tumors. Most of the patients (65.8%) had high clinical risk scores (3–5), and 165 (90%) underwent concurrent liver resection. The median tumor size was 10 mm. After a median follow-up period of 28.8 months, LR was observed in 45 tumors, and the cumulative incidence of LR at 24 months was 10.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.0–14.3%]. In 7%, LR was the first recurrence site, often combined with recurrence elsewhere. The cumulative incidence of LR at 24 months was 6.8% (95% CI 3.8–11.0%) for tumors 10 mm in size or smaller, 12.4% (95% CI 7.8–18.1%) for tumors 11 to 20 mm in size, and 30.2% (95% CI 14.2–48.0%) for tumors larger than 20 mm. In the multivariable analysis, tumors larger than 20 mm with a subcapsular location were significantly associated with increased LR risk.

Conclusions

Treatment of CRLM with 2.45-GHz MWA offers excellent local control at 2 years and is most successful for small tumors deep within the parenchyma.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fong Y, Fortner J, Sun RL, et al. Clinical score for predicting recurrence after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of 1001 consecutive cases. Ann Surg. 1999;230:309–18 (discussion 318–21).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. House MG, Ito H, Gönen M, et al. Survival after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: trends in outcomes for 1600 patients during two decades at a single institution. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210(744–52):752–5.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Adam R, Hagopian EJ, Linhares M, et al. A comparison of percutaneous cryosurgery and percutaneous radiofrequency for unresectable hepatic malignancies. Arch Surg. 2002;137:1332–9 (discussion 1340).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Iannitti DA, Martin RC, Simon CJ, et al. Hepatic tumor ablation with clustered microwave antennae: the US phase II trial. HPB Oxford. 2007;9:120–4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Kingham TP, Karkar AM, D’Angelica MI, et al. Ablation of perivascular hepatic malignant tumors with irreversible electroporation. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;215:379–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Leung U, Kuk D, D’Angelica MI, et al. Long-term outcomes following microwave ablation for liver malignancies. Br J Surg. 2015;102:85–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Franzese C, Comito T, Clerici E, et al. Liver metastases from colorectal cancer: propensity score-based comparison of stereotactic body radiation therapy vs. microwave ablation. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2018;144:1777–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Palma DA, Olson R, Harrow S, et al. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy versus standard of care palliative treatment in patients with oligometastatic cancers (SABR-COMET): a randomised, phase 2, open-label trial. Lancet. 2019;393:2051–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Groeschl RT, Pilgrim CH, Hanna EM, et al. Microwave ablation for hepatic malignancies: a multiinstitutional analysis. Ann Surg. 2014;259:1195–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Correa-Gallego C, Fong Y, Gonen M, et al. A retrospective comparison of microwave ablation vs. radiofrequency ablation for colorectal cancer hepatic metastases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:4278–83.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Takahashi H, Kahramangil B, Kose E, et al. A comparison of microwave thermosphere versus radiofrequency thermal ablation in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases. HPB Oxford. 2018;20:1157–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sun Y, Cheng Z, Dong L, et al. Comparison of temperature curve and ablation zone between 915- and 2450-MHz cooled-shaft microwave antenna: results in ex vivo porcine livers. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:553–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Curto S, Taj-Eldin M, Fairchild D, et al. Microwave ablation at 915 MHz vs 2.45 GHz: a theoretical and experimental investigation. Med Phys. 2015;42:6152–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Martin RC, Scoggins CR, McMasters KM. Safety and efficacy of microwave ablation of hepatic tumors: a prospective review of a 5-year experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:171–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Abdalla EK, Vauthey JN, Ellis LM, et al. Recurrence and outcomes following hepatic resection, radiofrequency ablation, and combined resection/ablation for colorectal liver metastases. Ann Surg. 2004;239:818–25 (discussion 825–7).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ardito F, Panettieri E, Vellone M, et al. The impact of R1 resection for colorectal liver metastases on local recurrence and overall survival in the era of modern chemotherapy: an analysis of 1428 resection areas. Surgery. 2019;165:712–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhou B, Fine J, Latouche A, et al. Competing risks regression for clustered data. Biostatistics. 2012;13:371–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Abreu de Carvalho LF, Logghe B, Van Cleven S, et al. Local control of hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastases after surgical microwave ablation without concomitant hepatectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2021;406:2749–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Simo KA, Tsirline VB, Sindram D, et al. Microwave ablation using 915-MHz and 2.45-GHz systems: What are the differences? HPB Oxford. 2013;15:991–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30CA008748 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to T. Peter Kingham MD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

There are no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karagkounis, G., McIntyre, S.M., Wang, T. et al. Rates and Patterns of Recurrence After Microwave Ablation of Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Per Lesion Analysis of 416 Tumors in the Era of 2.45 GHz Generators. Ann Surg Oncol 30, 6571–6578 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13751-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13751-6

Keywords

Navigation