Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 17;109(9):djx015. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djx015

Table 2.

Local treatment received in the combined treatment arm

Radiofrequency/surgery Method
Total (n = 57)
RFA only (n = 30) RFA plus resection* (n = 27)
No. (%) No. (%) No. (%)
Means of radiofrequency administration
  At laparotomy 25 (83.3) 26 (96.3) 51 (89.5)
  Laparascopically 1 (3.3) 0 (0.0) 1 (1.8)
  Percutaneously 4 (13.3) 0 (0.0) 4 (7.0)
  No RFA performed 0 (0.0) 1 (3.7)* 1 (1.8)
Worst margin for resected† tumors per patient (n = 27), cm
  ≥1 NA 10 (37.0)
  <1 NA 16 (59.3)
  Residual tumor NA 1 (3.7)
Worst margin for tumors treated by radiofrequency per patient (n = 56), cm (n = 26) (n = 56)
  ≥1 8 (26.7) 5 (19.2) 13 (23.2)
  <1 16 (53.3) 17 (65.4) 33 (58.9)
  No margin 4 (13.3) 1 (3.8) 5 (8.9)
  Unknown 2 (6.7) 3 (11.5) 5 (8.9)
Treatment of at least one liver metastasis unsuccessful
  No 29 (96.7) 26 (96.3) 55 (96.5)
  Yes 1 (3.3) 1 (3.7) 2 (3.5)
*

One patient was ineligible; all lesions were resected at baseline, no RFA done. RFA = radiofrequency ablation.

Resection consisted of one segment or wedge resection(s) (n = 16) or resection of two or more liver segments (n = 11).

For this patient, one lesion could not be successfully treated by RFA because of its close proximity to the stomach.