|
| Study, location | Diagnosis | Average size of lesion (mm) | Approach | RFA equipment | Needle size | Strength of RFA | Number of RFA sessions (average) | Technical success | Complications | Follow-up (months) | Comments |
|
| Armellini et al., Italy [11] | PNET | 20 | NM | VIVA RF generator (STARmed, Koyang, Korea) | 18 G | 5 W | 1 | 1/1 (100%) | None | 1 | This report adds to the increasing evidence of PNETs being successfully treated by ablative therapies, which may represent a potential alternative to surgery in selected cases. |
|
| Lakhtakia et al., India [12] | PNET (insulinoma) = 3 | NM | TG = 2
TD = 1 | Novel internally cooled needle electrode | 19 G | NM | NM | 3/3 (100%) | None | 5 | EUS-RFA is feasible, apparently safe, and effective for symptom relief in symptomatic pancreatic insulinoma. |
|
| Pai et al., UK [8] | Mucinous cyst = 4
IPMN = 1
Microcystic adenoma = 1
PNET = 2 | 36.5 | TG = 8 | Habib EUS-RFA catheter | 19 G or 22 G | 5 W = 3
15 W = 2
20 W = 2
25 W = 1 | 4.5 (2–7) | 8/8 (100%) | 2/8 (25%) had mild abdominal pain | 3–6 | The response ranged from complete resolution to a 50% reduction in diameter of lesion. |
|
| Song et al., South Korea [10] | Pancreatic cancer in head = 2 or in body = 4 | 38 (30–90) | NM | VIVA RF generator (STARmed, Koyang, Korea) | 18 G | 20 W or 50 W | 1.3 (1-2) | 6/6 (100%) | 2/6 (33%) had mild abdominal pain | 2–6 | EUS-RFA may be used as an adjunct and effective alternative treatment method for unresectable pancreatic cancer. |
|
| Pai et al., UK [13] | Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma = 7 | 35.2 | NM | Habib EUS-RFA catheter | 19 G or 22 G | 5 W = 1
10 W = 3
15 W = 3 | 3 (2–4) | 7/7 (100%) | 1/7 (14%) had mild pancreatitis | 3–6 | |
|
| Wang et al., China [14] | Pancreatic carcinoma | 37.3 | NM | Habib EUS-RFA catheter | 22 G | 10 W or 15 W | 3.7 | 3/3 (100%) | None | 1.5 | EUS-RFA of pancreatic carcinoma was technically easy and safe and well tolerated by the patients and achieved a considerable reduction in tumor size and CA19-9 levels. |
|
