
==== Front
World J Surg OncolWorld Journal of Surgical Oncology1477-7819BioMed Central London 1477-7819-2-301535020110.1186/1477-7819-2-30Technical InnovationsSingle group study to evaluate the feasibility and complications of radiofrequency ablation and usefulness of post treatment position emission tomography in lung tumours Kang Shijun 1shijun@uic.eduLuo Rongcheng 1rongcheng@fimmu.edu.cnLiao Wangjun 1wangjun@fimmu.edu.cnWu Hubing 2hubin@fimmu.edu.cnZhang Xuelin 3xuelin@fimmu.edu.cnMeng Yuru 1ruthmwk@yahoo.com1 Department of Oncology, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou, P.R.China, 5105152 PET Center, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou, P.R.China, 5105153 Medical Image Center, Nanfang Hospital, Guangzhou, P.R.China, 5105152004 6 9 2004 2 30 30 23 5 2004 6 9 2004 Copyright © 2004 Kang et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.2004Kang et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Background
There is genuine need to develop interventional treatment options for management of lung tumors. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is one such alternative being promoted to treat lung tumors recently. Larger studies should help define RFA's further development. Furthermore fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) has been reported to be an accurate indicator of treatment response in variety of tumors. This study focuses on the evaluating the feasibility of RFA and usefulness of PET scan in lung tumors after RFA procedure.

Patients and methods
Between November 1999 and May 2002, 50 patients with primary or metastasis pulmonary tumors underwent RFA procedure. The electrode was guided to the target areas using computerized tomography (CT). Tumors smaller than 3.5 cm were given single RFA, while tumors larger than 3.5 cm received RFA to multiple sites. Maximum 4 lesions or 6 target areas were treated during one operating procedure. Whole body and/or lung PET images were acquired; identical site CT images and chest X-ray were taken 1 week before and after RFA.

Results
Of the 50 patients, 17 had single lesions while rest had multiple lesions. Tumors smaller than 3.5 cm were completely dissipated after RFA. In tumors larger than 3.5 cm, the part within 3.5 cm diameter dissipated. While CT showed that tumor image became larger 1 to 2 weeks after RFA procedure. PET demonstrated tumor destruction in 70% cases, compared to 38% in CT.

Conclusion
The present study shows RFA to be safe and effective treatment option for lung tumors. PET is superior to CT in evaluation the effectiveness of RFA treatment shortly after the procedure.
==== Body
Background
Lung cancer continues to be the leading cause of cancer deaths in United States [1]. The overall prognosis of lung cancer is still dismal despite all current early detection and treatment efforts. Only about 20–25% of lung cancers can potentially be cured by surgery. The majority of patients presents with locally advanced or metastatic disease, and treatments essentially rely on external beam irradiation, chemotherapy or a combination of both [2]. Thus other interventional palliative treatment options have been developed for these lesions.

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA), is an imaging-guided percutaneous ablative procedure, that has been suggested to be an effective treatment option for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and metastatic disease who are not suitable candidates for surgery [3,4]. Guided by computed tomography (CT), physicians are able to localize the tumor and determine the optimal approach. During RFA, current passing through tissue from the active electrode leads to ion agitation and frictional heat generation. This leads to irreparable cellular damage and coagulation necrosis [5]. Recently a number of studies reported its application in malignant lung tumours. Accurate assessment of treatment response remains one of the major problems.

PET has been reported to be an accurate indicator of treatment response in variety of tumors [13-17]. However, its use has been limited to evaluating disease stage in lung tumors [18-24]. PET imaging, provides proliferation and metabolism information, is sensitive and specific to diagnose malignant lesions from benign. Coleman and colleagues has provided substantial information in evaluating the role of PET in management of lung cancers [21-23]. In this report we focus on evaluating the feasibility of RFA, its complication and on evaluating the role of PET on RFA response in lung tumors.

Patients and methods
Between November 1999 and May 2002, 50 patients with either primary or metastatic lung tumors were enrolled in to a prospective single group trial. Patient characteristics are detailed in Table 1. Patients with bleeding potentials or serious heart, liver and renal failures were excluded. Antibiotics and medicines for prevention of bleeding were given regularly. Every patient underwent a chest Flurodeoxyhlucose postron emission (PET) and CT scan before procedure.

Table 1 Patient characteristics

	Patients (n = 50)	
Patient characteristic	No		%	
Age, years				
 Median		51		
 Range		35–74		
Sex				
 Male	32		64	
 Female	18		36	
Origins				
 Primary lung tumors	23		46	
 Metastases from breast	13		26	
 Metastases from colon	9		18	
 Metastases from other places	5		10	
No. of patient with lesions				
 Single lesion	17		34	
 Multiple lesions	33		66	
Total lesions received RFA		120		
Patients received a chest X-ray and CT for preoperative evaluation and a repeat scan after RFA procedure. A PET scan was performed one week after the treatment.

The Radiofrequency ablation was carried out using RF-2000 generator and related software purchased from Radio Therapeutics Corporation, USA; PET imaging was done using an Advance 2 Scanner (General Electric Medical Systems, WI, USA).

Patients received general anesthesia along with local infiltration of Lidocaine. The electrodes were directed to target areas during RFA procedure using CT scan. The initial power applied was 50 W, which was subsequently increased to a maximum 90 W over several minutes. RFA continued for 5 to 15 min until roll off was achieved, which continued for 2 min to stop. Tumors smaller than 3.5 cm were given full heating energy only once, while tumors larger than 3.5 cm received multiple RFA to different areas. Maximum 4 lesions or 6 target areas were treated during one procedure.

One to two weeks after the procedure and a 4 hour fast, patients were taken for PET scan. They were made to rest for 15 min, and then received 18F-FDG 296 MBq – 440 MBq (8 mCi -12 mCi) intravenously. After another period of rest lasting for 45–60 min, the whole body and/or lung images was acquired by PET scanner. PET was also acquired at 5–8 bed positions, typically from the base of skull to the mid thigh, which was identical to the CT protocol used in the present study. The complications of the treatment are detailed in table 2 and results are summarized in table 3.

Table 2 Complications of Radiofrequency ablation

	Patients (n = 50)	
Complication	No	%	
Fever	10	20	
Congested pneumonia	6	12	
Pneumothorax	9	18	
Hemothorax	1	2	
Table 3 Early effectiveness of RFA by various techniques

	Tumor destruction demonstrated	
Technique	No	%	
All 50 patients received			
 PET	35	70	
 CT	19	38	
 X-ray	13	26	
Results
After RFA procedure a number of complications were seen. Fever and/or congested pneumonia were commonest complications seen in 32% of patients; however, they were cured in a week with antibiotics treatment. Pneumothorax occurred during procedures in 18% and the patients were treated with aspiration. Five of these had small pneumothorax that did not require and treatment. One patient had hemothorax which required intercostals drainage (ICD) which was removed 2 days later. These were no life threatening events or deaths.

Post procedural PET demonstrated the effectiveness of RFA on lung tumors. Tumors smaller than 3.5 cm showed complete response after RFA (Figure 1). In tumors larger than 3.5 cm, the part within 3.5 cm diameter dissipated, while the part outside this 3.5 cm area remained (Figure 2). Damage to the normal tissue outside the tumor was not extensive in any cause.

Figure 1 PET images taken before and after RFA treatments: coronal (A, B), and Sagittal (C, D) views of PET scans of lung cancer. (A, C) were taken before RFA treatment; (B, D) were taken two weeks after RFA treatment.

Figure 2 PET images taken before and after RFA treatments. This patient had a tumor size larger than 3.5 cm. PET scans were taken 1 week before (A) and 2 weeks after (B) RFA treatment.

The Chest X-ray and CT showed that tumor image became larger 1 to 2 weeks after RFA procedure (Figure 3). These may result from partial tissue damages, bleeding, acute inflammation or pneumonia, and support the routing use of antibiotics and haemostatic drugs after RFA. The tumor destruction was picked up by PET much effectively when compared to CT scan or chest X-ray.

Figure 3 CT images taken before and after RFA treatments. The same patient PET images were shown as Figure 1. (A) was taken before RFA treatment, (B) was taken 2 week after RFA treatment.

Discussion
Since RFA ablates lung tumors directly and locally, marginal tissues surrounding the tumor are frequently partially damaged leading to occasional pneumonia. It is difficult for regular CT and/or chest X-rays to discriminate pathological-physiological tissue damage and fibrillation from the treatment effect of RFA. PET on the other hand provides information on functional and metabolic activity anatomically, and is the only available technique which can specifically diagnose tumors or necrosis after surgery and radiotherapy effectively [28]. Our experience too proves that PET is particularly superior to CT in its ability to evaluate the effectiveness of RFA treatment early after therapy.

RFA is a relatively noninvasive, well-tolerated approach. It could destruct tumor completely within the effective diameter while avoiding the surgery, side effects of radiotherapy and toxicity of high dose chemotherapy. Our observations suggest that RFA can kill lung tumors smaller than 3.5 cm after a single RFA procedure. The effect of RFA appears to be limited within 3.5 cm diameter area with the current instruments. However, this also suggests that RFA may not damage the normal tissues surrounding the small tumors. The malignant lesions dissipated in 1 to 2 weeks, while the surrounding tissue stayed intact. While at this period regular chest CT and chest X-ray may show enlarged lesion images. This is in agreement with other reports. With improvements in technology, RFA in combination with other options may further reduce the morbidity and mortality of cancer deaths [11]. Though complications do occur, they are usually curable. RFA results in a higher rate of complete necrosis and requires fewer treatment cycles compared to traditional chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Besides CT guidance help to localize the tumor and determine the optimal approach further optimizes specific of targeting the tumor. For patients with non-small cell lung malignancy who are not candidates for surgery owing to poor cardio respiratory reserve, RFA alone or followed by conventional radiation therapy or chemotherapy may prove to be a treatment option [11]. For patients with metastatic disease, RFA may be suitable for treatment of a small tumor or reduce symptoms caused by large tumor burden. This technique can be used as a primary technique or in conjunction with other interventional procedures [11]. Further randomized controlled trials comparing RFA with conventional palliative treatment are needed before RFA can be accepted as a routine treatment modality. Survival of patient and quality of life issues too need be addressed.

Conclusions
Despite inherent deficiency of trial design our single group study clearly demonstrates that RFA can be an effective treatment option for lung tumors. Unlike other interventional techniques, RFA provide controlled regions of coagulation necrosis with a single application to an area with 3.5 cm diameter. RFA may cure small lung tumor, reduce tumor burden in larger lesions and may be combined with external beam radiation and/or systemic chemotherapy for further improvements. PET provides functional and metabolic activity anatomically and is particularly superior to CT in evaluation the effectiveness shortly after RFA procedure. Absence of follow-up information and randomization in the current study are two major fallacies which need to be addressed in subsequent studies.

Authors' contributions
SJK is the leading physician and drafted the manuscript.

RL, WL, HW, XZ, YM all participated in the study, patient management, literature search and preparation of manuscript.

All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Competing interests
None declared.
==== Refs
Williams MD Sandler AB  The epidemiology of lung cancer Cancer Treat Res 2001 105 31 52 11224993 
Noppen N  Interventional palliative treatment options for lung cancer Ann Oncol 2002 13 Suppl 4 247 250 12401697 
Dupuy DE Mayo-Smith WW Abbott GF DiPetrillo T  Clinical applications of radio-frequency tumor ablation in the thorax Radiographics 2002 22 Spec No S259 69 12376615 
Chhajed PN Tamm M  Radiofrequency heat ablation for lung tumors: potential applications Med Sci Monit 2003 9 ED5 7 14586281 
Gazelle GS Goldberg SN Solbiati L Livraghi T  Tumor ablation with radio-frequency energy Radiology 2000 217 633 646 11110923 
Wong CY Salem R Raman S Gates VL Dworkin HJ  Evaluating 90Y-glass microsphere treatment response of unresectable colorectal liver metastases by [18F]FDG PET: a comparison with CT or MRI Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002 29 815 820 12029557 10.1007/s00259-002-0787-4 
Wang W Larson SM Fazzari M Tickoo SK Kolbert K Sgouros G Yeung H Macapinlac H Rosai J Robbins RJ  Prognostic value of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic scanning in patients with thyroid cancer J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000 85 1107 1113 10720047 10.1210/jc.85.3.1107 
Price DT Coleman RE Liao RP Robertson CN Polascik TJ DeGrado TR  Comparison of [18 F]fluorocholine and [18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose for positron emission tomography of androgen dependent and androgen independent prostate cancer J Urol 2002 168 273 280 12050555 10.1097/00005392-200207000-00090 
Voth M Opfermann T Gottschild D  [The value of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in differentiation of pancreatic lesions] Zentralbl Chir 2003 128 375 378 12813634 10.1055/s-2003-40030 
Lowe VJ Dunphy FR Varvares M Kim H Wittry M Dunphy CH Dunleavy T McDonough E Minster J Fletcher JW Boyd JH  Evaluation of chemotherapy response in patients with advanced head and neck cancer using [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography Head Neck 1997 19 666 674 9406745 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0347(199712)19:8<666::AID-HED4>3.3.CO;2-C 
Peschina W  [F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in lung lesions] Wien Med Wochenschr 2002 152 265 268 12138653 10.1046/j.1563-258X.2002.02019.x 
Berlangieri SU Scott AM Knight SR Fitt GJ Hennessy OF Tochon-Danguy HJ Clarke CP McKay WJ  F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the non-invasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999 16 Suppl 1 S25 30 10536941 
Hunter GJ Hamberg LM Choi N Jain RK McCloud T Fischman AJ  Dynamic T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography in patients with lung cancer: correlating vascular physiology with glucose metabolism Clin Cancer Res 1998 4 949 955 9563889 
Coleman RE  PET in lung cancer staging Q J Nucl Med 2001 45 231 234 11788815 
Coleman RE  Value of FDG-PET scanning in management of lung cancer Lancet 2002 359 1361 1362 11978328 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08388-5 
Gonzalez-Stawinski GV Lemaire A Merchant F O'Halloran E Coleman RE Harpole DH D'Amico TA  A comparative analysis of positron emission tomography and mediastinoscopy in staging non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003 126 1900 1905 14688703 10.1016/S0022-5223(03)01036-5 
Marom EM McAdams HP Erasmus JJ Goodman PC Culhane DK Coleman RE Herndon JE Patz E. F., Jr.  Staging non-small cell lung cancer with whole-body PET Radiology 1999 212 803 809 10478250 
Burt BM Humm JL Kooby DA Squire OD Mastorides S Larson SM Fong Y  Using positron emission tomography with [(18)F]FDG to predict tumor behavior in experimental colorectal cancer Neoplasia 2001 3 189 195 11494112 10.1038/sj.neo.7900147 
Coleman RE  FDG imaging Nucl Med Biol 2000 27 689 690 11091113 10.1016/S0969-8051(00)00139-6 
Liao WJ Luo RC Kang SJ Wu HB Wang CB Luo YL Zhang MJ  Investigation of short-term therapy results for radiofrequency ablation by positron emission tomography Di Yi Jun Yi Da Xue Xue Bao 2002 22 376 377 12390754 
Kostakoglu L Goldsmith SJ  18F-FDG PET evaluation of the response to therapy for lymphoma and for breast, lung, and colorectal carcinoma J Nucl Med 2003 44 224 239 12571214 
Akhurst T Downey RJ Ginsberg MS Gonen M Bains M Korst R Ginsberg RJ Rusch VW Larson SM  An initial experience with FDG-PET in the imaging of residual disease after induction therapy for lung cancer Ann Thorac Surg 2002 73 259 64; discussion 264-6 11834020 10.1016/S0003-4975(01)03257-X 
Herrera LJ Fernando HC Perry Y Gooding WE Buenaventura PO Christie NA Luketich JD  Radiofrequency ablation of pulmonary malignant tumors in nonsurgical candidates J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003 125 929 937 12698158 10.1067/mtc.2003.18 
Rose DM Allegra DP Bostick PJ Foshag LJ Bilchik AJ  Radiofrequency ablation: a novel primary and adjunctive ablative technique for hepatic malignancies Am Surg 1999 65 1009 1014 10551746

