Safety margin of embolized area can reduce local recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after superselective transarterial chemoembolization

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We aimed to determine the relationship between the safety margin of an embolized area and local tumor recurrence (LTR) of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who underwent superselective transarterial chemoembolization (TACE). METHODS: The medical records of 77 HCC patients with 109 HCC nodules who underwent superselective TACE were retrospectively analyzed for LTR. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for 16 potential factors using Cox proportional hazard regression. Iodized oil deposition on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging was divided into three grades: A=complete tumor staining and complete circumferential safety margin, B=complete tumor staining but incomplete safety margin, C=incomplete tumor staining. The effect of a safety margin on LTR was evaluated by comparison between grade A and B group. RESULTS: Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that grade A iodized oil deposition and portal vein visualization were the only two independent significant factors of LTR (P<0.001 and P=0.029, respectively). The 12- and 24-month LTR rates of tumors for grade A (n=62), grade B (n=30), and grade C (n=17) were 16% vs. 41% vs. 100% and 16% vs. 61% vs. 100%, respectively (P<0.001). The tumors in the grade A group had a 75% risk reduction in LTR (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.10 to 0.64; P=0.004) compared to the grade B group. CONCLUSIONS: LTR was significantly lower when a greater degree of iodized oil deposition occurred with a complete circumferential safety margin. In superselective TACE, the safety margin of the embolized areas using intraprocedural CBCT affected LTR in HCC patients.

Hepatitis B screening rates and reactivation in solid organ malignancy patients undergoing chemotherapy in Southern Thailand

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) following chemotherapy (CMT) is well-known among hematologic malignancies, and screening recommendations are established. However, HBVr data in solid organ malignancy (SOM) patients are limited. This study aims to determine hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening rates, HBV prevalence, and the rate of significant hepatitis caused by HBVr in SOM patients undergoing CMT.METHODS: Based on the Oncology unit’s registration database from 2009–2013, we retrospectively reviewed records of all SOM patients ≥18 years undergoing CMT at Songklanagarind Hospital who were followed until death or ≥6 months after CMT sessions. Exclusion criteria included patients without baseline liver function tests (LFTs) and who underwent CMT before the study period. We obtained and analyzed baseline clinical characteristics, HBsAg screening, and LFT data during follow-up.RESULTS: Of 3,231 cases in the database, 810 were eligible. The overall HBsAg screening rate in the 5-year period was 27.7%. Screening rates were low from 2009–2012 (7.8–21%) and increased in 2013 to 82.9%. The prevalence of HBV among screened patients was 7.1%. Of those, 75% underwent prophylactic antiviral therapy. During the 6-month follow-up period, there were three cases of significant hepatitis caused by HBVr (4.2% of all significant hepatitis cases); all were in the unscreened group.CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of HBV in SOM patients undergoing CMT in our study was similar to the estimated prevalence in general Thai population, but the screening rate was quite low. Cases of HBVr causing significant hepatitis occurred in the unscreened group; therefore, HBV screening and treatment in SOM patients should be considered in HBV-endemic areas.

The Value of Carlsson-Dent Questionnaire in Diagnosis of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Area With Low Prevalence of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Symptom-based diagnosis for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been accepted in the population with high prevalence. Carlsson-Dent questionnaire (CDQ) is a standardized symptom-based diagnosis tool for GERD. The value of this tool in the population with low prevalence is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine CDQ performance for diagnosis of GERD in Thai population with low prevalence versus endoscopy or 24 hour pH monitoring. METHODS: Patients with dyspepsia by Rome II criteria were recruited. All patients completed a Thai version of CDQ and underwent endoscopic examination. Those without esophagitis or peptic ulcer and positive CDQ score took pH monitoring. RESULTS: One hundred patients (68 female) with mean age +/- SD of 45.6 +/- 12.4 years were recruited. Six with Los Angeles grade A esophagitis had negative CDQ score. In 44 with positive CDQ score, 3 had Los Angeles grade B esophagitis and 41 had pH monitoring done with 8 having positive test. The GERD diagnosis by CDQ was confirmed in 11 of 44 patients (25%). CDQ detected 11 out of 17 GERD detected by endoscopy and pH monitoring and the sensitivity of CDQ was 64%. CONCLUSIONS: CDQ diagnosed more GERD in Thai population with low prevalence compared with endoscopy and pH monitoring. This may be due to some patients with functional heartburn were picked up by CDQ and some patients with GERD were not detected by endoscopy and pH monitoring.