ABSTRACT
STUDY PURPOSE: The DRAGON 1 trial aims to assess training, implementation, safety and feasibility of combined portal- and hepatic-vein embolization (PVE/HVE) to accelerate future liver remnant (FLR) hypertrophy in patients with borderline resectable colorectal cancer liver metastases. METHODS: The DRAGON 1 trial is a worldwide multicenter prospective single arm trial. The primary endpoint is a composite of the safety of PVE/HVE, 90-day mortality, and one year accrual monitoring of each participating center. Secondary endpoints include: feasibility of resection, the used PVE and HVE techniques, FLR-hypertrophy, liver function (subset of centers), overall survival, and disease-free survival. All complications after the PVE/HVE procedure are documented. Liver volumes will be measured at week 1 and if applicable at week 3 and 6 after PVE/HVE and follow-up visits will be held at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the resection. RESULTS: Not applicable. CONCLUSION: DRAGON 1 is a prospective trial to assess the safety and feasibility of PVE/HVE. Participating study centers will be trained, and procedures standardized using Work Instructions (WI) to prepare for the DRAGON 2 randomized controlled trial. Outcomes should reveal the accrual potential of centers, safety profile of combined PVE/HVE and the effect of FLR-hypertrophy induction by PVE/HVE in patients with CRLM and a small FLR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04272931 (February 17, 2020). Toestingonline.nl: NL71535.068.19 (September 20, 2019).
Subject(s)
Embolization, Therapeutic , Liver Neoplasms , Accreditation , Embolization, Therapeutic/methods , Hepatectomy/methods , Hepatic Veins/pathology , Hepatomegaly , Humans , Hypertrophy/etiology , Hypertrophy/pathology , Hypertrophy/surgery , Liver/surgery , Liver Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/therapy , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Portal Vein/pathology , Prospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Purpose The goal of the study was to review current literature regarding the diagnosis of equivocal (50-70%) iliofemoral artery stenosis and compare these findings with the daily practice of an international panel of endovascular experts. Methods The Medline Database was searched for relevant publications, and an electronic survey was sent to experts in the field covering the following topics: definition of an equivocal iliofemoral artery stenosis, angiographic visualization and investigation protocols of an equivocal stenosis, intra-arterial pressure measurements, and definition of hemodynamic significance of an equivocal iliofemoral artery stenosis using a physiologic measure. Results Of the 37 invited endovascular experts, 21 (53.8%) agreed to participate in the survey. Analysis of existing literature shows that the level of evidence for diagnosing equivocal iliofemoral artery stenosis is mediocre and is not being implemented by experts in the field. Conclusion Studies have shown that a stenosis of between 50% and 70% iliofemoral lumen diameter reduction shows a wide range of trans-stenotic pressure gradients. Equivocal iliofemoral artery stenosis can best be identified using three-dimensional quantitative vascular analysis software. Although evidence for a clear hemodynamic cutoff point is weak, performing trans-lesion intra-arterial pressure measurements at rest and during maximal hyperemia is preferred. Diagnosing iliofemoral artery stenosis solely on lumen diameter reduction is inadequate.
Subject(s)
Angiography , Blood Pressure Determination , Femoral Artery/diagnostic imaging , Hemodynamics , Iliac Artery/diagnostic imaging , Peripheral Arterial Disease/diagnostic imaging , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Constriction, Pathologic , Femoral Artery/physiopathology , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Hyperemia/physiopathology , Iliac Artery/physiopathology , Peripheral Arterial Disease/physiopathology , Predictive Value of Tests , Prognosis , Regional Blood Flow , Reproducibility of Results , Severity of Illness IndexABSTRACT
We present a patient with a recurrent precaval left renal artery, stemming from a right-sided common trunk renal artery. The patient was a 44-year male who presented with a post-traumatic grade IV renal injury. After 3 months without renal function improvement and repeated urinary tract infection, a laparoscopic nephrectomy of the affected right kidney was performed, without upfront identification of the vascular variation, resulting in ischemia of the remaining left kidney. An anastomosis of the common renal trunk and the distal left renal artery was created in between the abdominal aorta and the inferior vena cava. This case describes the importance of upfront detection of renal vascular variations using the appropriate imaging techniques.
