Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108546
Emiliano Garza-Frias, Rui Dai, Ranjodh Dhami, Ryan Chung, Ronald S Arellano
Purpose: To evaluate the technique, safety, and clinical outcomes of computed tomography-guided microwave ablation of cystic renal masses.
Material and methods: An institutional database was used to identify consecutive patients with cystic renal masses that were treated with percutaneous microwave ablation. Pre-ablation computed tomography or magnetic resonance images were reviewed by 2 board-certified, fellowship-trained abdominal radiologists to classify cystic renal masses as complex or Bosniak III/IV masses. A third board-certified, fellowship-trained radiologist served as the tiebreaker for cases of discordance between the two readers. Tumor factors such as size and renal nephrometry score were recorded. Ablation technique, including management of the cystic component of the tumors, adjunctive maneuvers, and power and time for the ablations, were recorded. Technical success, primary and secondary efficacy, adverse events, and clinical outcomes were assessed.
Results: Fifty-six patients with 61 cystic renal masses underwent CT-guided microwave ablation. The diagnostic yield of biopsy of cystic renal masses was 87%. Fifty of the 61 cystic renal masses (82%) were renal cell carcinoma. Primary technical success rate was 95.1%. There was no significant change in serum creatinine or estimated glomerular filtration rate pre-and post-ablation. There were 4 (8%) SIR grade 1 adverse events, all of which were small perinephric hematomas.
Conclusion: Computed tomography-guided microwave ablation of cystic renal masses, including cystic RCC, is technically feasible, highly effective, and associated with a low adverse event rate.
{"title":"Percutaneous Microwave Ablation of Complex Cystic Renal Masses: Assessment of Technique, Safety and Clinical Outcomes.","authors":"Emiliano Garza-Frias, Rui Dai, Ranjodh Dhami, Ryan Chung, Ronald S Arellano","doi":"10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108546","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108546","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the technique, safety, and clinical outcomes of computed tomography-guided microwave ablation of cystic renal masses.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>An institutional database was used to identify consecutive patients with cystic renal masses that were treated with percutaneous microwave ablation. Pre-ablation computed tomography or magnetic resonance images were reviewed by 2 board-certified, fellowship-trained abdominal radiologists to classify cystic renal masses as complex or Bosniak III/IV masses. A third board-certified, fellowship-trained radiologist served as the tiebreaker for cases of discordance between the two readers. Tumor factors such as size and renal nephrometry score were recorded. Ablation technique, including management of the cystic component of the tumors, adjunctive maneuvers, and power and time for the ablations, were recorded. Technical success, primary and secondary efficacy, adverse events, and clinical outcomes were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-six patients with 61 cystic renal masses underwent CT-guided microwave ablation. The diagnostic yield of biopsy of cystic renal masses was 87%. Fifty of the 61 cystic renal masses (82%) were renal cell carcinoma. Primary technical success rate was 95.1%. There was no significant change in serum creatinine or estimated glomerular filtration rate pre-and post-ablation. There were 4 (8%) SIR grade 1 adverse events, all of which were small perinephric hematomas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Computed tomography-guided microwave ablation of cystic renal masses, including cystic RCC, is technically feasible, highly effective, and associated with a low adverse event rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":49962,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"108546"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146044393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2026.107991
{"title":"Crossword Puzzle","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jvir.2026.107991","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jvir.2026.107991","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49962,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":"37 4","pages":"Article 107991"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146025956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108545
Song Xue, Tiandong Lu, Qi Sun, Peng Qiu, Chaoyi Cui, Xinwu Lu, Xiaobing Liu
Objective: To compare chronic pelvic pain (CPP) outcomes after pelvic venous embolization in patients with pelvic venous disorders (PeVD) with versus without iliac vein compression (IVComp).
Methods: Patients with PeVD who underwent pelvic venous embolization at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were categorized into IVComp group and non-IVComp group based on the presence of IVComp. CPP control and CPP-free survival were compared between these two groups. Risk factors for CPP non-control were analyzed via logistic regression. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limb was examined in the IVComp group after the intervention.
Results: Among 102 collected patients, IVComp was identified in 51 patients (50.0%). The IVComp group was younger (35.7± 6.7 vs. 43.6±12.1, P< .001) and had more lower limb involvement (18/51, 35.3% vs. 6/51, 11.8%, p= .009). CPP control rates (non-IVComp group, 40/51, 78.4% vs. IVComp group, 42/51, 82.4%, P=1.00) and CPP-free survival rates (P=.941) did not differ significantly between groups. Pre-intervention VAS score (adjusted OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.67, p < .001) and lower limb involvement (adjusted OR = 7.49, 95% CI: 2.10-26.68, p = .002) were independent predictors for CPP non-control. No DVT of the lower limb was found at one month follow up in 47 IVComp patients.
Conclusions: In patients with PeVD and concomitant IVComp but without severe lower limb venous disorder, primary venous embolization alone, without iliac vein stent placement, appears to be safe and effective.
目的：比较有髂静脉压迫（IVComp）和没有髂静脉压迫（IVComp）的盆腔静脉疾病（PeVD）患者盆腔静脉栓塞后慢性盆腔疼痛（CPP）的结果。方法：回顾性分析在单中心行盆腔静脉栓塞术的PeVD患者。根据有无IVComp将患者分为IVComp组和非IVComp组。比较两组的CPP对照组和无CPP生存期。采用logistic回归分析非控制性CPP的危险因素。IVComp组干预后检查下肢深静脉血栓形成情况。结果：在收集的102例患者中，51例（50.0%）发现了IVComp。IVComp组患者更年轻（35.7±6.7比43.6±12.1，P< 0.001），下肢受累更多（18/51,35.3%比6/51,11.8%,P = 0.009）。CPP控制率（非IVComp组，40/51,78.4% vs IVComp组，42/51,82.4%，P=1.00）和无CPP生存率（P= 0.941）组间差异无统计学意义。干预前VAS评分（校正OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.67, p < .001）和下肢受累（校正OR = 7.49, 95% CI: 2.10-26.68, p = .002）是CPP非对照的独立预测因子。47例IVComp患者随访1个月未发现下肢深静脉血栓。结论：在PeVD合并IVComp但没有严重下肢静脉疾病的患者中，单独进行初级静脉栓塞而不放置髂静脉支架似乎是安全有效的。
{"title":"Impact of iliac vein compression on the outcome of pelvic venous embolization in patients with pelvic venous disorder.","authors":"Song Xue, Tiandong Lu, Qi Sun, Peng Qiu, Chaoyi Cui, Xinwu Lu, Xiaobing Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108545","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108545","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare chronic pelvic pain (CPP) outcomes after pelvic venous embolization in patients with pelvic venous disorders (PeVD) with versus without iliac vein compression (IVComp).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with PeVD who underwent pelvic venous embolization at a single center were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were categorized into IVComp group and non-IVComp group based on the presence of IVComp. CPP control and CPP-free survival were compared between these two groups. Risk factors for CPP non-control were analyzed via logistic regression. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower limb was examined in the IVComp group after the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 102 collected patients, IVComp was identified in 51 patients (50.0%). The IVComp group was younger (35.7± 6.7 vs. 43.6±12.1, P< .001) and had more lower limb involvement (18/51, 35.3% vs. 6/51, 11.8%, p= .009). CPP control rates (non-IVComp group, 40/51, 78.4% vs. IVComp group, 42/51, 82.4%, P=1.00) and CPP-free survival rates (P=.941) did not differ significantly between groups. Pre-intervention VAS score (adjusted OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.67, p < .001) and lower limb involvement (adjusted OR = 7.49, 95% CI: 2.10-26.68, p = .002) were independent predictors for CPP non-control. No DVT of the lower limb was found at one month follow up in 47 IVComp patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with PeVD and concomitant IVComp but without severe lower limb venous disorder, primary venous embolization alone, without iliac vein stent placement, appears to be safe and effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":49962,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":" ","pages":"108545"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146044340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2025.107942
{"title":"The International Symposium on Endovascular Therapy (ISET) 2026","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jvir.2025.107942","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jvir.2025.107942","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49962,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":"37 2","pages":"Article 107942"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146037589","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108547
Stella Chen MD, PhD , Ian W. Sullivan DO , Nathan E. Frenk MD , Perry Hampilos MD , Kei Yamada MD
Purpose
To compare traditional minimally invasive treatments for necrotizing pancreatitis with a novel percutaneous approach, drain irrigation with vacuum assistance (DIVA) necrosectomy.
Materials and Methods
In this retrospective, single-center study, 20 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis treated with minimally invasive necrosectomy between June 2022 and June 2024 at a tertiary care center were reviewed: 6 received DIVA, and 14 received video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy (ETN). In the DIVA procedure, a suction device is inserted in a mature drain tract in tandem with an irrigation catheter, and vacuum debridement is performed with negative pressure reaching 98.9 kPa. Demographic data and preprocedural severity were recorded. The number of procedures each patient underwent, time to imaging resolution, and the number and nature of adverse events experienced were compared between the DIVA and VARD/ETN groups.
Results
Patients who underwent DIVA had higher disease severity at presentation (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, 15.0 vs 6.5; P = .012) and reached resolution of abdominal fluid collections more quickly (48.8 days vs 110.1 days, P = .017). DIVA patients all reached resolution, whereas only 12 (86%) of 14 VARD/ETN reached resolution. Additionally, DIVA trended toward fewer adverse events, although this difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03–1.5; P = .161).
Conclusions
Despite higher disease severity at presentation, patients undergoing image-guided DIVA necrosectomy experienced a faster resolution than VARD/ETN patients. These preliminary results warrant further research into DIVA’s role in treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis.
目的：本研究比较了传统微创治疗坏死性胰腺炎与一种新的经皮方法，真空辅助引流术（DIVA）坏死性切除术。材料和方法：在这项回顾性单中心研究中，回顾了2022年6月至2024年6月在三级保健中心接受微创坏死切除术治疗的20例坏死性胰腺炎患者：6例接受DIVA， 14例接受视频辅助腹膜后清创（VARD）或内镜下经胃坏死切除术（ETN）。DIVA手术是在成熟的引流道内插入吸引装置，配合冲洗导管，负压达到98.9kPa进行真空清创。记录人口统计数据和术前严重程度。比较DIVA组和VARD/ETN组之间每位患者接受手术的次数、成像分辨率的时间以及所经历的不良事件的数量和性质。结果：接受DIVA的患者在就诊时疾病严重程度更高（急性生理和慢性健康评估（APACHE） II评分15.0比6.5,p = 0.012），并且更快地达到腹腔积液的溶解（48.8天比110.1天，p = 0.017）。DIVA患者均达到缓解，而14例VARD/ETN患者中只有12例（86%）达到缓解。此外，DIVA倾向于较少的不良事件，尽管这种差异无统计学意义（RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.03-1.5, p = 0.161）。结论：尽管首发时疾病严重程度较高，但与VARD/ETN患者相比，接受图像引导的DIVA坏死切除术的患者缓解速度更快。这些初步结果为进一步研究DIVA在治疗坏死性胰腺炎中的作用提供了依据。
{"title":"Drain Irrigation with Vacuum Assistance Necrosectomy in Necrotizing Pancreatitis","authors":"Stella Chen MD, PhD , Ian W. Sullivan DO , Nathan E. Frenk MD , Perry Hampilos MD , Kei Yamada MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108547","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.jvir.2026.108547","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To compare traditional minimally invasive treatments for necrotizing pancreatitis with a novel percutaneous approach, drain irrigation with vacuum assistance (DIVA) necrosectomy.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and Methods</h3><div>In this retrospective, single-center study, 20 patients with necrotizing pancreatitis treated with minimally invasive necrosectomy between June 2022 and June 2024 at a tertiary care center were reviewed: 6 received DIVA, and 14 received video-assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or endoscopic transgastric necrosectomy (ETN). In the DIVA procedure, a suction device is inserted in a mature drain tract in tandem with an irrigation catheter, and vacuum debridement is performed with negative pressure reaching 98.9 kPa. Demographic data and preprocedural severity were recorded. The number of procedures each patient underwent, time to imaging resolution, and the number and nature of adverse events experienced were compared between the DIVA and VARD/ETN groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Patients who underwent DIVA had higher disease severity at presentation (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score, 15.0 vs 6.5; <em>P</em> = .012) and reached resolution of abdominal fluid collections more quickly (48.8 days vs 110.1 days, <em>P</em> = .017). DIVA patients all reached resolution, whereas only 12 (86%) of 14 VARD/ETN reached resolution. Additionally, DIVA trended toward fewer adverse events, although this difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03–1.5; <em>P</em> = .161).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Despite higher disease severity at presentation, patients undergoing image-guided DIVA necrosectomy experienced a faster resolution than VARD/ETN patients. These preliminary results warrant further research into DIVA’s role in treatment of necrotizing pancreatitis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49962,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":"37 4","pages":"Article 108547"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146044334","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/S1051-0443(25)00815-2
{"title":"Cover","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/S1051-0443(25)00815-2","DOIUrl":"10.1016/S1051-0443(25)00815-2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":49962,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology","volume":"37 2","pages":"Article 107975"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146038070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号