Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography guidance avoids US-CT/MR fusion error for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING BMC Medical Imaging Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1186/s12880-024-01508-w
Yang-Bor Lu, Yung-Ning Huang, Yu-Chieh Weng, Tung-Ying Chiang, Ta-Kai Fang, Wei-Ting Chen, Jung-Chieh Lee
{"title":"Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography guidance avoids US-CT/MR fusion error for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma.","authors":"Yang-Bor Lu, Yung-Ning Huang, Yu-Chieh Weng, Tung-Ying Chiang, Ta-Kai Fang, Wei-Ting Chen, Jung-Chieh Lee","doi":"10.1186/s12880-024-01508-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study evaluated the impact of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) combined with CT or MRI fusion imaging on percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) outcomes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) inconspicuous on conventional ultrasonography (US).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients were categorized into US-inconspicuous (USI) and US-conspicuous (USC) groups based on US imaging. The parameters of viable HCCs ⎯ including diameter, location, and RFA efficacy ⎯ were compared between USI and USC groups. Moreover, the breathing fusion imaging errors were measured. The differences in technical success, technical efficacy, local tumor progression, new tumor occurrence, and overall survival rate between USI and USC groups were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-five patients with 106 lesions were included. CEUS showed high consistency with CT/MRI but revealed larger diameters (p < 0.001) and more feeding arteries (p = 0.019) than CT/MRI. Breathing fusion imaging errors averaged 17 ± 4 mm, significantly affecting lesions in segments II, III, V, and VI (p < 0.001). The USI group had more lesions ablated per patient in a single RFA procedure (p = 0.001) than the USC group. No significant differences were observed in technical success rate, technical efficacy rate, local tumor progression rate, and overall survival rate between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CEUS combined with fusion imaging provides detailed information on viable HCCs and their feeding arteries. CEUS-guided RFA avoids fusion imaging errors and achieves comparable efficacy in both US-conspicuous and US-inconspicuous HCCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":9020,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Imaging","volume":"24 1","pages":"323"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11605966/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-024-01508-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study evaluated the impact of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) combined with CT or MRI fusion imaging on percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) outcomes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) inconspicuous on conventional ultrasonography (US).

Methods: Patients were categorized into US-inconspicuous (USI) and US-conspicuous (USC) groups based on US imaging. The parameters of viable HCCs ⎯ including diameter, location, and RFA efficacy ⎯ were compared between USI and USC groups. Moreover, the breathing fusion imaging errors were measured. The differences in technical success, technical efficacy, local tumor progression, new tumor occurrence, and overall survival rate between USI and USC groups were analyzed.

Results: Sixty-five patients with 106 lesions were included. CEUS showed high consistency with CT/MRI but revealed larger diameters (p < 0.001) and more feeding arteries (p = 0.019) than CT/MRI. Breathing fusion imaging errors averaged 17 ± 4 mm, significantly affecting lesions in segments II, III, V, and VI (p < 0.001). The USI group had more lesions ablated per patient in a single RFA procedure (p = 0.001) than the USC group. No significant differences were observed in technical success rate, technical efficacy rate, local tumor progression rate, and overall survival rate between the two groups.

Conclusions: CEUS combined with fusion imaging provides detailed information on viable HCCs and their feeding arteries. CEUS-guided RFA avoids fusion imaging errors and achieves comparable efficacy in both US-conspicuous and US-inconspicuous HCCs.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Imaging
BMC Medical Imaging RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
198
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Imaging is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the development, evaluation, and use of imaging techniques and image processing tools to diagnose and manage disease.
期刊最新文献
High-risk habitat radiomics model based on ultrasound images for predicting lateral neck lymph node metastasis in differentiated thyroid cancer. Investigating resting-state functional connectivity changes within procedural memory network across neuropsychiatric disorders using fMRI. Optimizing hip MRI: enhancing image quality and elevating inter-observer consistency using deep learning-powered reconstruction. Comparison of diagnostic performance for pulmonary nodule detection between free-breathing spiral ultrashort echo time and free-breathing radial volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination. Knowledge discovery from database: MRI radiomic features to assess recurrence risk in high-grade meningiomas.
×
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