Radiation Segmentectomy versus Selective Chemoembolization in the Treatment of Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Biederman, D.; Titano, J.; Korff, R.; Fischman, A.; Patel, Rahul; Nowakowski, F.; Lookstein, R.; Kim, Edward

doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2017.08.026

Cited by 56 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study retrospectively compared RS with segmental TACE in patients with a solitary lesion ≤3 cm. After propensity matching, complete radiographic response (mRECIST) and time to secondary therapy (TTST) significantly favored RS compared with segmental TACE (CR: 92.1% versus 52.6%, TTST: 812 versus 162 days, respectively), whereas OS was not significantly different …”

Section: Bridge/down‐staging To Liver Transplantmentioning

confidence: 99%

Locoregional Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Transarterial Chemoembolization Versus Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy†

Kulik

2019

Clinical Liver Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of locoregional therapy (LRT) has various potential roles in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC.) It is important to determine what the intended goal of LRT is prior to receipt of LRT. The choice of one form of therapy over another is often dictated by center preference and more importantly experience. This article will review the various forms of LRT that are often used in the treatment of HCC. BriDGe/DOWn-sTaGinG TO liver TransPlanTTransarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the most common form of LRT employed as a bridge or down-staging modality to LT. Factors that have been associated with dropout while awaiting LT include: one tumor of 3.1 to 5 cm (versus one tumor ≤3 cm), two or three tumors (versus a single tumor), a lack of a complete response to the first LRT,

show abstract

Section: Bridge/down‐staging To Liver Transplantmentioning

confidence: 99%

Locoregional Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Transarterial Chemoembolization Versus Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy†

Kulik

2019

Clinical Liver Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Initial studies demonstrated that intraarterial 90 Y microspheres could cause significant tumor necrosis because the tumor is radiosensitive (5), and that unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma showed improvements in tumor vascularity and lifespan (9). Later studies showed that, in localized disease, outcomes for 90 Y radioembolization were similar to or better than those for other locoregional therapies, such as transarterial chemoembolization or ablation (10,11).…”

Section: Indicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Primary Liver Tumors and Liver Metastases, Part 1: Nuclear Medicine Techniques

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Y-90 radioembolization is an increasingly utilized treatment for both primary and metastatic malignancy in the liver. Understanding the biophysical properties, dosing concerns, and imaging appearance of this treatment is important for interventional radiologists and nuclear medicine physicians to provide important therapy. Y-90 radioembolization is efficacious and safe, although the possibility of complications does exist. This article provides a comprehensive in-depth discussion about the indications for Y-90 radioembolization, reviews the role of preprocedural angiography and MAA scans, illustrates different dosing techniques, compares and contrasts resin and glass microspheres, and confers potential complications.

show abstract

“…Unresectable hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) are commonly treated by chemoembolization and radioembolization (1,2). Radiation segmentectomy is a kind of radioembolization that delivers a higher ablative dose into the affected segmental arteries, which results in better tumor response and improved progression-free survival compared with selective chemoembolization (3,4). Radiation segmentectomy is frequently adopted for early-stage HCCs smaller than 3 cm or 5 cm, with a target perfused tissue dose greater than 190 Gy (5,6).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of Boosted Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Larger than 5 cm

Kim

Lee

et al. 2019

Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiation Segmentectomy versus Selective Chemoembolization in the Treatment of Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Cited by 56 publications

References 19 publications

Locoregional Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Transarterial Chemoembolization Versus Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy†

Locoregional Therapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Transarterial Chemoembolization Versus Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy†

Treatment of Primary Liver Tumors and Liver Metastases, Part 1: Nuclear Medicine Techniques

Feasibility of Boosted Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Larger than 5 cm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About