Benign PI was slightly more prevalent than clinically worrisome PI in our cohort of patients with cancer. The presence of certain CT features (mesenteric stranding, bowel wall thickening, and ascites) and the location of PI may be indicators of more significant bowel disease and, therefore, of clinically worrisome cases. There was no statistical significance achieved for nonimaging clinical factors.

This prostate cancer bone biopsy protocol ensures a valuable source for high-quality DNA and RNA for tumor sequencing and may be used to detect actionable alterations and resistance mechanisms in patients with bone metastases. Cancer 2018;124:1008-15. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Objective To highlight the role of interventional radiology (IR) in the treatment of patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Methods Retrospective review of hospitalized patients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and had one or more IR procedures at a tertiary referral hospital in New York City during a 6-week period in April and May of 2020. Results Of the 724 patients admitted with COVID-19, 92 (12.7%) underwent 124 interventional radiology procedures (79.8% in IR suite, 20.2% at bedside). The median age of IR patients was 63 years (range 24–86 years); 39.1% were female; 35.9% in the intensive care unit. The most commonly performed IR procedures were central venous catheter placement (31.5%), inferior vena cava filter placement (9.7%), angiography/embolization (4.8%), gastrostomy tube placement (9.7%), image-guided biopsy (10.5%), abscess drainage (9.7%), and cholecystostomy tube placement (6.5%). Thoracentesis/chest tube placement and nephrostomy tube placement were also performed as well as catheter-directed thrombolysis of massive pulmonary embolism and thrombectomy of deep vein thrombosis. General anesthesia (10.5%), monitored anesthesia care (18.5%), moderate sedation (29.8%), or local anesthetic (41.1%) was utilized. There were 3 (2.4%) minor complications (SIR adverse event class B), 1 (0.8%) major complication (class C), and no procedure-related death. With a median follow-up of 4.3 months, 1.1% of patients remain hospitalized, 16.3% died, and 82.6% were discharged. Conclusion Interventional radiology participated in the care of hospitalized COVID-19 patients by performing a wide variety of necessary procedures.

Purpose To test the hypothesis that the geometry of probe placement with respect to the pleural puncture site affects the risk of pneumothorax after microwave (MW) ablation in the lung. Materials and Methods Computed tomography–guided MW ablation of the lung was performed in 8 swine under general anesthesia and mechanical ventilation. The orientation of the 17-gauge probe was either perpendicular (90°) or parallel (< 30°) with respect to the pleural puncture site, and the ablation power was 30 W or 65 W for 5 minutes. After MW ablation, swine were euthanized, and histopathologic changes were assessed. Frequency and factors affecting pneumothorax were evaluated by multivariate analysis. Results Among 62 lung MW ablations, 13 (21%) pneumothoraces occurred. No statistically significant difference was noted in the rate of pneumothorax between the perpendicular and the parallel orientations of the probe (31% vs 14%; odds ratio [OR], 2.8; P = .11). The pneumothorax rate was equal for 65-W and 30-W ablation powers (21% and 21%; OR, 1.0; P = .94). Under multivariate analysis, 2 factors were independent positive predictors of pneumothorax: ablation zone inclusive of pleural insertion point (OR, 7.7; P = .02) and time since intubation (hours) (OR, 2.7; P = .02). Conclusions Geometries where the pleural puncture site excluded the ablation zone decreased pneumothorax in swine undergoing MW ablation in the lung. Treatment planning to ensure that the pleural puncture site excludes the subsequent ablation zone may reduce the rate of pneumothorax in patients undergoing MW ablation in the lung.

Image-guided ablation is safe and effective for the treatment of both primary and metastatic tumors in the lung. This article reviews the three most commonly used ablative options: radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, and cryoablation. We describe the advantages of each ablation modality in the lung and how to choose the most appropriate ablation device based on patient and tumor characteristics. The optimal technique for lung ablation is discussed and technical tips for improving clinical outcome are described.