Outcome of Transarterial Radioembolization in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Glass Versus Resin Microsphere.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-14 DOI:10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9
Gyoung Min Kim, Do Young Kim, Jong Yun Won, Sungmo Moon, Seung Up Kim, Beom Kyung Kim
{"title":"Outcome of Transarterial Radioembolization in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Glass Versus Resin Microsphere.","authors":"Gyoung Min Kim, Do Young Kim, Jong Yun Won, Sungmo Moon, Seung Up Kim, Beom Kyung Kim","doi":"10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the treatment outcomes of glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluate the prognostic factors that influence the outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 251 consecutive patients who underwent radioembolization for the treatment of HCC at a single tertiary center. Imaging responses after radioembolization were evaluated using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 195 patients were included in this study (glass microsphere, n = 75; resin microsphere, n = 120). The complete and objective response rates were 16.0% and 50.7% in the glass microsphere group and 17.5% and 58.3% in the resin microsphere group, respectively. Median PFS was 241 days in the glass microsphere group and 268 days in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.871). Median OS was 29 months in the glass microsphere group and 40 months in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.669). The only significant prognostic factor was bilobar tumor distribution, which favored resin microspheres (p = 0.023). Procedure-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the resin microsphere group (glass, 2.7% vs. resin, 5.0%; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of HCC did not show a significant difference in survival, though major adverse events occurred more frequently with the use of resin microspheres.</p>","PeriodicalId":9591,"journal":{"name":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-024-03726-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the treatment outcomes of glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluate the prognostic factors that influence the outcomes.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 251 consecutive patients who underwent radioembolization for the treatment of HCC at a single tertiary center. Imaging responses after radioembolization were evaluated using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic factors.

Results: A total of 195 patients were included in this study (glass microsphere, n = 75; resin microsphere, n = 120). The complete and objective response rates were 16.0% and 50.7% in the glass microsphere group and 17.5% and 58.3% in the resin microsphere group, respectively. Median PFS was 241 days in the glass microsphere group and 268 days in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.871). Median OS was 29 months in the glass microsphere group and 40 months in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.669). The only significant prognostic factor was bilobar tumor distribution, which favored resin microspheres (p = 0.023). Procedure-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the resin microsphere group (glass, 2.7% vs. resin, 5.0%; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of HCC did not show a significant difference in survival, though major adverse events occurred more frequently with the use of resin microspheres.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经动脉放射栓塞治疗肝细胞癌的疗效:玻璃微球与树脂微球。
目的:比较玻璃微球和树脂微球治疗肝细胞癌(HCC)的疗效,并评估影响疗效的预后因素:我们回顾性研究了在一家三级中心接受放射栓塞治疗的251例连续患者。放射栓塞术后的影像学反应采用改良的实体瘤反应评估标准(mRECIST)1.1进行评估。无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)采用 Kaplan-Meier 法进行分析。采用单变量和多变量考克斯比例危险模型确定预后因素:本研究共纳入195名患者(玻璃微球,n = 75;树脂微球,n = 120)。玻璃微球组的完全反应率和客观反应率分别为16.0%和50.7%,树脂微球组的完全反应率和客观反应率分别为17.5%和58.3%。玻璃微球组的中位生存期为241天,树脂微球组的中位生存期为268天(P = 0.871)。玻璃微球组的中位OS为29个月,树脂微球组的中位OS为40个月(P = 0.669)。唯一重要的预后因素是双叶肿瘤分布,这有利于树脂微球(p = 0.023)。树脂微球组发生与手术相关的不良事件的频率更高(玻璃,2.7%;树脂,5.0%;p 结论:树脂微球组发生与手术相关的不良事件的频率更高(玻璃,2.7%;树脂,5.0%;p):玻璃微球和树脂微球治疗 HCC 在存活率方面没有显著差异,但树脂微球发生重大不良事件的频率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
13.80%
发文量
306
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology (CVIR) is the official journal of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe, and is also the official organ of a number of additional distinguished national and international interventional radiological societies. CVIR publishes double blinded peer-reviewed original research work including clinical and laboratory investigations, technical notes, case reports, works in progress, and letters to the editor, as well as review articles, pictorial essays, editorials, and special invited submissions in the field of vascular and interventional radiology. Beside the communication of the latest research results in this field, it is also the aim of CVIR to support continuous medical education. Articles that are accepted for publication are done so with the understanding that they, or their substantive contents, have not been and will not be submitted to any other publication.
期刊最新文献
Technical Considerations for Safety and Efficacy: Microballoon-Occluded Transcatheter Embolization Using n-butyl-2-Cyanoacrylate for Treatment of Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformation Transpleural Inferior Phrenic Artery to Pulmonary Artery Fistula: An Increasingly Common and Important Vascular Anomaly Percutaneous Management of an Unstable Pathological Fracture of L5 Using Vertical Presacral Screw Fixation and Cementoplasty Non-perforating Temporary Diameter Reduction Ties for Physician-Modified Endografts Invited Commentary on using ChatGPT to Improve Readability of Interventional Radiology Procedure Descriptions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1