Aim Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a non-thermal ablative option in patients unsuitable for standard thermal ablation, due to its potential to preserve collagenous structures (vessels and ducts) and a reduced susceptibility to heat sink effects. In this series from two large tertiary referral hepatobiliary centres, we aim to assess the safety/outcomes of hepatic IRE. Materials and Methods Bi-institutional retrospective, longitudinal follow-up series of IRE for primary hepatic malignancy; [hepatocellular carcinoma ( n = 20), cholangiocarcinoma ( n = 3)] and secondary metastatic disease; colorectal ( n = 28), neuroendocrine ( n = 1), pancreatic ( n = 1), breast ( n = 1), gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST, n = 1) and malignant thymoma ( n = 1). Outcome measures included procedural safety/effectiveness, time to progression and time to death. Results Between 2013 and 2017, 52 patients underwent percutaneous IRE of 59 liver tumours in 53 sessions. All tumours were deemed unsuitable for thermal ablation. Cases were performed using ultrasound (US) or computed tomography (CT) guidance. A complete ablation was achieved in n = 44, (75%) of cases with an overall complication rate of 17% ( n = 9). Of the complete ablation group, median time to progression was 8 months. At 12 months, 44% were progression-free (95% CI 30–66%). The data suggest that larger lesion size (> 2 cm) is associated with shorter time to progression and there is highly significant difference with faster time to progression in mCRC compared with HCC. Median survival time was 38 months. Conclusion This bi-institutional review is the largest UK series of IRE and suggests this ablative technology can be a useful tool, but appears to mainly induce local tumour control rather than cure with HCC having better outcomes than mCRC.
Several publications show that superselective conventional TransArterial ChemoEmbolization (cTACE), meaning cTACE performed selectively with a microcatheter positioned as close as possible to the tumor, improves outcomes, maximizing the anti-tumoral effect and minimizing the collateral damages of the surrounding liver parenchyma. Recent recommendations coming from the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) highlighted that TACE must be used in Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) “selectively targetable” and “accessible to supraselective catheterization.” The goal of the manuscript is to better define such population and to standardize superselective cTACE (ss-cTACE) technique. An expert panel with extensive clinical-procedural experience in TACE, have come together in a virtual meeting to generate recommendations and express their consensus. Experts recommend that anytime cTACE is proposed, it should be ss-cTACE, preferably with a 1.5–2.0 Fr microcatheter. Ideally, ss-cTACE should be proposed to patients with less than five lesions and a maximum number of two segments involved, with largest tumor smaller than 5 cm. Angio Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) should be used to detect enhancing tumors, tumor feeders and guide tumor targeting. Whole tumor volume should be covered to obtain the best response. Adding peritumoral margins is encouraged but not mandatory. The treatment should involve a water-in-oil emulsion, whose quality is assessable with the “drop test.” Additional particulate embolization should be systematically performed, as per definition of cTACE procedure. Non-contrast CBCT or Multi-Detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) combined with angiography has been considered the gold standard for imaging during TACE, and should be used to assess tumor coverage during the procedure. Experts convene that superselectivity decreases incidence of adverse effects and improves tolerance. Experts recommend contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography (CT) as initial imaging on first follow-up after ss-cTACE, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) if remaining tumor viability cannot be confidently assessed on CT. If no response is obtained after two ss-cTACE sessions within six months, patient must be considered unsuitable for TACE and proposed for alternative therapy. Patients are best served by multidisciplinary decision-making, and Interventional Radiologists should take an active role in patient selection, treatment allocation, and post-procedural care.
Introduction Splenic lesions are uncommon and frequently cause a diagnostic dilemma, often with non-specific findings on both ultrasound and cross-sectional imaging with histological confirmation necessary. To reduce patient morbidity, primarily from haemorrhage and to increase diagnostic yield, precise imaging and biopsy targeting are needed. Case We present a case of an indeterminate complex splenic lesion, with areas of necrosis which required histological diagnosis. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided percutaneous core needle biopsy was undertaken to provide real-time imaging guidance, increasing viable lesion targeting and helping to avoid areas of necrosis. Conclusion Contrast-enhanced ultrasound guidance of the percutaneous core needle biopsy allowed increased operator confidence in lesional targeting accuracy and reduced the number of passes required for biopsy, simultaneously maximising histological yield and minimising patient morbidity.
Our results demonstrate wide variation in the interpretation of the French scale by different manufacturers of medical devices. This has the potential to lead to problems using coaxial systems especially when the products are from different manufacturers. It is recommended that standard labelling should be employed by all manufacturers conveying specific details of the equipment. Given the wide variation in the interpretation of the French scale, our opinion is that this scale either needs to be abandoned or be strictly defined and followed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.