Objective: To describe the imaging appearances and treatment response patterns of the pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (panNETs) following radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Methods: From an internal database, 17 patients (8 male; mean age: 67±14 y) with 18 pathology-proven, localized, nonfunctioning panNETs <3 cm who underwent EUS-RFA for curative intent were included. A total of 32 preablation and 33 postablation scans were included (CT, MRI, or 68 Ga-DOTATATE PET). Lesion size and enhancement on CT/MRI were independently assessed by 2 readers, while SUVmax was extracted from the original PET reports by a separate reviewer. The Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar tests were performed. Treatment response is defined as a complete response (loss of enhancement and SUVmax), a partial response (decrease in size, enhancement, or SUVmax), or no response (no change). Results: Mean lesion size decreased from 1.4±0.5 cm preablation to 0.3±0.5 cm postablation ( P <0.0001). Mean SUVmax declined from 17.3±11.2 to 3.1±6.0 ( P <0.001). Hyperenhancement was present in 15/18 (83.3%) lesions preablation versus 5/18 (27.8%) postablation ( P <0.01). Of these 15 hyperenhancing lesions, 11 were solid, 3 were cystic, and 1 was mixed cystic and solid. Complete response occurred in 12/18 (66.7%) lesions, with either complete disappearance 5/12 (41.4%) or bland cavity formation 7/12 (58.5%). Partial response occurred in 5/18 (27.8%) lesions; 4/5 decreased in size (mean±SD: 1.4±0.5 cm preablation vs. 0.6±0.7 cm postablation), and 3/5 demonstrated decreased SUVmax. One patient with partial response underwent 2 repeat ablations with an ultimate decrease in SUVmax from 34.1 to 5.9. One solid, hyperenhancing pancreatic body lesion demonstrated no response (1.3 cm); preablation SUVmax was 10.8, but they did not undergo postablation DOTATATE PET. One patient developed postablation pancreatitis. Mean clinical follow-up was 650 days (423). Conclusion: RFA is an emerging treatment for small, nonfunctioning panNET. Postablation imaging findings most commonly included complete resolution of the tumor, decreased enhancement, decreased SUVmax, and formation of a bland cavity. As interest in this technique continues to grow, radiologists’ familiarity with expected post-treatment imaging appearances and their associated response patterns is essential for accurate assessment.
Platt et al. (Mon,) studied this question.