Percutaneous cryoablation: a novel treatment option in non-visceral metastases of the abdominal cavity after prior surgery.

PURPOSE: To assess the primary safety and oncological outcome of percutaneous cryoablation in patients with non-visceral metastases of the abdominal cavity after prior surgery. METHODS: All patients with non-visceral metastases after prior abdominal surgery, treated with percutaneous cryoablation, and at least one year of follow-up were retrospectively identified. Technical success was achieved if the ice-ball had a minimum margin of 10 mm in three dimensions on the per-procedural CT images. Complications were recorded using the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) classification system. Time until disease progression was monitored with follow-up CT and/or MRI. Local control was defined as absence of recurrence at the site of ablation. RESULTS: Eleven patients underwent cryoablation for 14 non-visceral metastases (mean diameter 20 ± 9 mm). Primary tumor origin was renal cell (n = 4), colorectal (n = 3), granulosa cell (n = 2), endometrium (n = 1) and appendix (n = 1) carcinoma. Treated metastases were localized retroperitoneal (n = 8), intraperitoneal (n = 2), or in the abdominal wall (n = 4). Technical success was achieved in all procedures. After a median follow-up of 27 months (12-38 months), all patients were alive. Local control was observed in 10/14 non-visceral metastases, and the earliest local progression was detected after ten months. No major adverse events occurred. One patient suffered a minor asymptomatic adverse event. CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept study suggests that cryoablation can be a minimal invasive treatment option in a selected group of patients with non-visceral metastases in the abdominal cavity after prior surgery.

Intra-Arterial Therapies for Liver Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: Performing a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence of intra-arterial therapies in liver metastatic breast cancer (LMBC) patients. METHODS: A systemic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS for studies regarding intra-arterial therapies in LMBC patients. Full text studies of LMBC patients (n ≥ 10) published between January 2010 and December 2020 were included when at least one outcome among response rate, adverse events or survival was available. Response rates were pooled using generalized linear mixed models. A weighted estimate of the population median overall survival (OS) was obtained under the assumption of exponentially distributed survival times. RESULTS: A total of 26 studies (1266 patients) were included. Eleven articles reported on transarterial radioembolization (TARE), ten on transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and four on chemo-infusion. One retrospective study compared TARE and TACE. Pooled response rates were 49% for TARE (95%CI 32-67%), 34% for TACE (95%CI 22-50%) and 19% for chemo-infusion (95%CI 14-25%). Pooled median survival was 9.2 months (range 6.1-35.4 months) for TARE, 17.8 months (range 4.6-47.0) for TACE and 7.9 months (range 7.0-14.2) for chemo-infusion. No comparison for OS was possible due to missing survival rates at specific time points (1 and 2 year OS) and the large heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Although results have to be interpreted with caution due to the large heterogeneity, the superior response rate of TARE and TACE compared to chemo-infusion suggests first choice of TARE or TACE in chemorefractory LMBC patients. Chemo-infusion could be considered in LMBC patients not suitable for TARE or TACE. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3a.

Quantitative Volumetric Assessment of Ablative Margins in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Predicting Local Tumor Progression Using Nonrigid Registration Software.

PURPOSE: After radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), pre- and postinterventional contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) images are usually qualitatively interpreted to determine technical success, by eyeballing. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of quantitative assessment, using a nonrigid CT-CT coregistration algorithm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 25 patients treated with RFA for HCC between 2009 and 2014 were retrospectively included. Semiautomated coregistration of pre- and posttreatment CECT was performed independently by two radiologists. In scans with a reliable registration, the tumor and ablation area were delineated to identify the side and size of narrowest RFA margin. In addition, qualitative assessment was performed independently by two other radiologists to determine technical success and the anatomical side and size of narrowest margin. Interobserver agreement rates were determined for both methods, and the outcomes were compared with occurrence of local tumor progression (LTP). RESULTS: CT-CT coregistration was technically feasible in 18/25 patients with almost perfect interobserver agreement for quantitative analysis (κ = 0.88). The interobserver agreement for qualitative RFA margin analysis was κ = 0.64. Using quantitative assessment, negative ablative margins were found in 12/18 patients, with LTP occurring in 8 of these patients. In the remaining 6 patients, quantitative analysis demonstrated complete tumor ablation and no LTP occurred. CONCLUSION: Feasibility of quantitative RFA margin assessment using nonrigid coregistration of pre- and postablation CT is limited, but appears to be a valuable tool in predicting LTP in HCC patients (p=0.013).

Quantitative margin assessment of radiofrequency ablation of a solitary colorectal hepatic metastasis using MIRADA RTx on CT scans: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Compared to surgery, radiofrequency ablation(RFA) for colorectal liver metastasis(CRLM) is associated with higher local recurrence(LR) rates. A wide margin (at least 5 mm) is generally recommended to prevent LR, but the optimal method to assess ablation margins is yet to be established. The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility and reproducibility of CT-CT co-registration, using MIRADA software, in order to assess ablation margins of patients with CRLM. METHODS: In this retrospective study, pre- and post-ablation contrast-enhanced CT scans of 29 patients, treated with percutaneous RFA for a solitary CRLM, were co-registered. Co-registration was performed by two independent radiologist, based on venous structures in proximity to the tumor. Feasibility of CT-CT co-registration and inter-observer agreement for reproducibility and ablation margins was determined. Furthermore, the minimal ablation margin was compared with the occurrence of LR during follow-up. RESULTS: Co-registration was considered feasible in 18 patients (61% male, 63.1(±10.9) year), with a perfect inter-observer agreement for completeness of ablation: κ = 1.0(p < 0.001). And substantial inter-observer agreement for measurement of the minimal margin (≤ 0 mm, 1-5 mm, ≥ 5 mm): κ = 0.723(p-value < 0.001). LR occurred in eight of nine(88.9%) incompletely ablated CRLM and in one of the nine completely ablated CRLM(11.1%). CONCLUSION: Co-registration using MIRADA is reproducible and potentially a valuable tool in defining technical success. Feasibility of co-registration of pre- and post-ablation CT scans is suboptimal if scans are not acquired concordantly. Co-registration may potentially aid in the prediction of LR after percutaneous ablation.