Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2014.15.1.95

Terminology and Reporting Criteria for Radiofrequency Ablation of Tumors in the Scientific Literature: Systematic Review of Compliance with Reporting Standards  

Kang, Tae Wook (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Rhim, Hyunchul (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Lee, Min Woo (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Kim, Young-Sun (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Choi, Dongil (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Lim, Hyo Keun (Department of Radiology and Center for Imaging Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Radiology / v.15, no.1, 2014 , pp. 95-107 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective: To perform a systematic review of compliance with standardized terminology and reporting criteria for radiofrequency (RF) tumor ablation, proposed by the International Working Group on Image-Guided Tumor Ablation in 2003, in the published reports. Materials and Methods: Literature search in the PubMed database was performed using index keywords, PubMed limit system, and eligibility criteria. The entire content of each article was reviewed to assess the terminology used for procedure terms, imaging findings, therapeutic efficacy, follow-up, and complications. Accuracy of the terminology and the use of alternative terms instead of standard terminology were analyzed. In addition, disparities in accuracy of terminology in articles according to the medical specialty and the type of radiology journal were evaluated. Results: Among the articles (n = 308) included in this study, the accuracy of the terms 'procedure or session', 'treatment', 'index tumor', 'ablation zone', 'technical success', 'primary technique effectiveness rate', 'secondary technique effectiveness rate', 'local tumor progression', 'major complication', and 'minor complication' was 97% (298/307), 97% (291/300), 8% (25/307), 65% (103/159), 55% (52/94), 33% (42/129), 94% (17/18), 45% (88/195), 99% (79/80), and 100% (77/77), respectively. The overall accuracy of each term showed a tendency to improve over the years. The most commonly used alternative terms for 'technical success' and 'local tumor progression' were 'complete ablation' and 'local (tumor) recurrence', respectively. The accuracy of terminology in articles published in radiology journals was significantly greater than that of terminology in articles published in non-radiology journals, especially in Radiology and The Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. Conclusion: The proposal for standardization of terminology and reporting criteria for RF tumor ablation has been gaining support according to the recently published scientific reports, especially in the field of radiology. However, more work is still needed for the complete standardization of terminology.
Keywords
Terminology; Neoplasms; Reference standards; Ablation techniques; Review;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Shen SH, Fennessy F, McDannold N, Jolesz F, Tempany C. Image-guided thermal therapy of uterine fibroids. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2009;30:91-104   DOI
2 Winter TC, Laeseke PF, Lee FT Jr. Focal tumor ablation: a new era in cancer therapy. Ultrasound Q 2006;22:195-217   DOI
3 Smith KA, Kim HS. Interventional radiology and image-guided medicine: interventional oncology. Semin Oncol 2011;38:151-162   DOI
4 Gillams AR. Image guided tumour ablation. Cancer Imaging 2005;5:103-109   DOI
5 Kurup AN, Callstrom MR. Ablation of skeletal metastases: current status. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010;21(8 Suppl):S242-S250   DOI
6 Pua BB, Thornton RH, Solomon SB. Ablation of pulmonary malignancy: current status. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010;21(8 Suppl):S223-S232   DOI
7 Wood BJ, Abraham J, Hvizda JL, Alexander HR, Fojo T. Radiofrequency ablation of adrenal tumors and adrenocortical carcinoma metastases. Cancer 2003;97:554-560   DOI
8 Lencioni R. Loco-regional treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 2010;52:762-773   DOI
9 Schmitz AC, Gianfelice D, Daniel BL, Mali WP, van den Bosch MA. Image-guided focused ultrasound ablation of breast cancer: current status, challenges, and future directions. Eur Radiol 2008;18:1431-1441   DOI
10 Breen DJ, Railton NJ. Minimally invasive treatment of small renal tumors: trends in renal cancer diagnosis and management. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2010;33:896-908   DOI
11 Goldberg SN, Grassi CJ, Cardella JF, Charboneau JW, Dodd GD 3rd, Dupuy DE, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009;20(7 Suppl):S377-S390   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Goldberg SN, Charboneau JW, Dodd GD 3rd, Dupuy DE, Gervais DA, Gillams AR, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: proposal for standardization of terms and reporting criteria. Radiology 2003;228:335-345   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Goldberg SN, Grassi CJ, Cardella JF, Charboneau JW, Dodd GD 3rd, Dupuy DE, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2005;16:765-778   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Goldberg SN, Grassi CJ, Cardella JF, Charboneau JW, Dodd GD 3rd, Dupuy DE, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria. Radiology 2005;235:728-739   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Strasberg SM, Phillips C. Use and dissemination of the brisbane 2000 nomenclature of liver anatomy and resections. Ann Surg 2013;257:377-382   DOI
16 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264-269   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Halligan S, Altman DG. Evidence-based practice in radiology: steps 3 and 4--appraise and apply systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Radiology 2007;243:13-27   DOI
18 Staunton M. Evidence-based radiology: steps 1 and 2--asking answerable questions and searching for evidence. Radiology 2007;242:23-31   DOI
19 Blana A, Brown SC, Chaussy C, Conti GN, Eastham JA, Ganzer R, et al. High-intensity focused ultrasound for prostate cancer: comparative definitions of biochemical failure. BJU Int 2009;104:1058-1062   DOI
20 Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, 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   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Mathur PN, Edell E, Sutedja T, Vergnon JM; American College of Chest Physicians. Treatment of early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2003;123(1 Suppl):176S-180S   DOI
22 Shaheen NJ, Sharma P, Overholt BF, Wolfsen HC, Sampliner RE, Wang KK, et al. Radiofrequency ablation in Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2277-2288   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Leoni CJ, Potter JE, Rosen MP, Brophy DP, Lang EV. Classifying complications of interventional procedures: a survey of practicing radiologists. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2001;12:55-59   DOI   ScienceOn
24 World Health Organization. WHO Handbook for Reporting Results of Cancer Treatment, WHO Offset publication No 48. Geneva: WHO, 1979
25 Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Burke DR, Lewis CA, Cardella JF, Citron SJ, Drooz AT, Haskal ZJ, et al. Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and biliary drainage. Society of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1997;8:677-681   DOI   ScienceOn