Intraprocedural Versus Initial Follow-up Minimal Ablative Margin Assessment After Colorectal Liver Metastasis Thermal Ablation: Which One Better Predicts Local Outcomes?

IF 7 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Investigative Radiology Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-07 DOI:10.1097/RLI.0000000000001023
Yuan-Mao Lin, Iwan Paolucci, Jessica Albuquerque Marques Silva, Caleb S O'Connor, Bryan M Fellman, Aaron K Jones, Joshua D Kuban, Steven Y Huang, Zeyad A Metwalli, Kristy K Brock, Bruno C Odisio
{"title":"Intraprocedural Versus Initial Follow-up Minimal Ablative Margin Assessment After Colorectal Liver Metastasis Thermal Ablation: Which One Better Predicts Local Outcomes?","authors":"Yuan-Mao Lin, Iwan Paolucci, Jessica Albuquerque Marques Silva, Caleb S O'Connor, Bryan M Fellman, Aaron K Jones, Joshua D Kuban, Steven Y Huang, Zeyad A Metwalli, Kristy K Brock, Bruno C Odisio","doi":"10.1097/RLI.0000000000001023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of 3-dimensional minimal ablative margin (MAM) quantified by intraprocedural versus initial follow-up computed tomography (CT) in predicting local tumor progression (LTP) after colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) thermal ablation.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This single-institution, patient-clustered, tumor-based retrospective study included patients undergoing microwave and radiofrequency ablation between 2016 and 2021. Patients without intraprocedural and initial follow-up contrast-enhanced CT, residual tumors, or with follow-up less than 1 year without LTP were excluded. Minimal ablative margin was quantified by a biomechanical deformable image registration method with segmentations of CLMs on intraprocedural preablation CT and ablation zones on intraprocedural postablation and initial follow-up CT. Prognostic value of MAM to predict LTP was tested using area under the curve and competing-risk regression model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 68 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 57 ± 12 years; 43 men) with 133 CLMs were included. During a median follow-up of 30.3 months, LTP rate was 17% (22/133). The median volume of ablation zone was 27 mL and 16 mL segmented on intraprocedural and initial follow-up CT, respectively ( P < 0.001), with corresponding median MAM of 4.7 mm and 0 mm, respectively ( P < 0.001). The area under the curve was higher for MAM quantified on intraprocedural CT (0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.94) compared with initial follow-up CT (0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.76) in predicting 1-year LTP ( P < 0.001). An MAM of 0 mm on intraprocedural CT was an independent predictor of LTP with a subdistribution hazards ratio of 11.9 (95% CI, 4.9-28.9; P < 0.001), compared with 2.4 (95% CI, 0.9-6.0; P = 0.07) on initial follow-up CT.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ablative margin quantified on intraprocedural CT significantly outperformed initial follow-up CT in predicting LTP and should be used for ablation endpoint assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":14486,"journal":{"name":"Investigative Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"314-319"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10939990/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigative Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000001023","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of 3-dimensional minimal ablative margin (MAM) quantified by intraprocedural versus initial follow-up computed tomography (CT) in predicting local tumor progression (LTP) after colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) thermal ablation.

Materials and methods: This single-institution, patient-clustered, tumor-based retrospective study included patients undergoing microwave and radiofrequency ablation between 2016 and 2021. Patients without intraprocedural and initial follow-up contrast-enhanced CT, residual tumors, or with follow-up less than 1 year without LTP were excluded. Minimal ablative margin was quantified by a biomechanical deformable image registration method with segmentations of CLMs on intraprocedural preablation CT and ablation zones on intraprocedural postablation and initial follow-up CT. Prognostic value of MAM to predict LTP was tested using area under the curve and competing-risk regression model.

Results: A total of 68 patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 57 ± 12 years; 43 men) with 133 CLMs were included. During a median follow-up of 30.3 months, LTP rate was 17% (22/133). The median volume of ablation zone was 27 mL and 16 mL segmented on intraprocedural and initial follow-up CT, respectively ( P < 0.001), with corresponding median MAM of 4.7 mm and 0 mm, respectively ( P < 0.001). The area under the curve was higher for MAM quantified on intraprocedural CT (0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.94) compared with initial follow-up CT (0.66; 95% CI, 0.54-0.76) in predicting 1-year LTP ( P < 0.001). An MAM of 0 mm on intraprocedural CT was an independent predictor of LTP with a subdistribution hazards ratio of 11.9 (95% CI, 4.9-28.9; P < 0.001), compared with 2.4 (95% CI, 0.9-6.0; P = 0.07) on initial follow-up CT.

Conclusions: Ablative margin quantified on intraprocedural CT significantly outperformed initial follow-up CT in predicting LTP and should be used for ablation endpoint assessment.

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
结直肠癌肝转移热消融术后术中与初次随访的最小消融边缘评估:哪一种能更好地预测局部结果?
目的:本研究的目的是研究通过术中与初始随访计算机断层扫描(CT)量化的三维最小消融边缘(MAM)在预测结直肠癌肝转移(CLM)热消融后局部肿瘤进展(LTP)中的预后价值。材料和方法:这项单一机构、患者集群、基于肿瘤的回顾性研究包括2016年至2021年间接受微波和射频消融的患者。未进行术中和初次随访的对比增强CT、残留肿瘤或随访不到1年且无LTP的患者被排除在外。最小消融边缘通过生物力学可变形图像配准方法进行量化,在手术前CT上分割CLM,在手术后和初始随访CT上分割消融区。使用曲线下面积和竞争风险回归模型测试MAM预测LTP的预后价值。结果:共有68名患者(平均年龄±标准差,57±12岁;43名男性),共133例CLM。在30.3个月的中位随访中,LTP发生率为17%(22/133)。在术中和初次随访CT上,消融区的中位体积分别为27 mL和16 mL(P<0.001),相应的中位MAM分别为4.7 mm和0 mm,在预测1年LTP方面,术中CT上定量的MAM曲线下面积(0.89;95%置信区间[CI],0.83-0.94)高于初始随访CT(0.66;95%可信区间,0.54-0.76)(P<0.001),与初次随访CT的2.4(95%CI,0.9-6.0;P=0.07)相比。结论:术中CT量化的消融裕度在预测LTP方面显著优于初次随访CT,应用于消融终点评估。
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
Investigative Radiology
Investigative Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
16.40%
发文量
188
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Investigative Radiology publishes original, peer-reviewed reports on clinical and laboratory investigations in diagnostic imaging, the diagnostic use of radioactive isotopes, computed tomography, positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, digital subtraction angiography, and related modalities. Emphasis is on early and timely publication. Primarily research-oriented, the journal also includes a wide variety of features of interest to clinical radiologists.
期刊最新文献
Deep Learning Reconstructed New-Generation 0.55 T MRI of the Knee-A Prospective Comparison With Conventional 3 T MRI. Free-Breathing High-Resolution, Swap-Free, and Motion-Corrected Water/Fat Separation in Pediatric Abdominal MRI. Relationship of Dose and Signal Enhancement Properties of Gadoquatrane, a New Tetrameric, Macrocyclic Gadolinium-Based Contrast Agent, Compared With Gadobutrol: A Randomized Crossover Study in Healthy Adults. Metabolic MRI With Hyperpolarized 13 C-Pyruvate for Early Detection of Fibrogenic Kidney Metabolism. Dedicated Photon-Counting CT for Detection and Classification of Microcalcifications: An Intraindividual Comparison With Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
×
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