eleven11 wrote:what is the difference between the two and why does MSKCC prefer RFA for lung mets? My mom's team always talks about SBRT.
Mastan wrote:Preference is probably dependent on individual circumstances. RFA is invasive whereas SBRT is not.
BrownBagger wrote:Mastan wrote:Preference is probably dependent on individual circumstances. RFA is invasive whereas SBRT is not.
I'm pretty sure this is true. They do both at MSKCC, I believe.
RFA may be invasive, but that doesn't necessarily mean there's more collateral damage. I had RFA with no residual diminution in lung capacity or function, but I've heard that SBRT can cause significant collateral damage. Again, probably depending on the individual situation, location of the tumors, etc.
I'm inclined to go with whatever my onc recommends. She knows a lot more about it than I do.
Rob in PA wrote:Simply put, in terms of order of preference...
1. Surgery
2. RFA
3. SBRT
Of course, there are other treatments, but i show this just to give you an idea of where SBRT sits. I had SBRT done three different times because i could not qualify for RFA or surgery. Once i got to the point where surgery was an option, I jumped on the chance and had VATS done on lung.
Best,
Rob
kennyt-wisted wrote:Rob in PA wrote:Simply put, in terms of order of preference...
1. Surgery
2. RFA
3. SBRT
Of course, there are other treatments, but i show this just to give you an idea of where SBRT sits. I had SBRT done three different times because i could not qualify for RFA or surgery. Once i got to the point where surgery was an option, I jumped on the chance and had VATS done on lung.
Best,
Rob
Rob, why did you never qualify for RFA?
hart2hart wrote:I would ask questions ----- why not RFA?
Pete just had successful RFA this past Wednesday and is back to work full time today!
Really pretty easy.....and the Docs at MSK were simply fantastic! Just saying.........
Return to “Colon Talk - Colon cancer (colorectal cancer) support forum”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 257 guests