mRECIST criteria to assess recurrent thyroid carcinoma treatment response after radiofrequency ablation: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: Surgical removal is recommended for recurrent thyroid carcinomas (RTCs) unable to uptake radioiodine and/or not responsive to chemotherapy. However, repeated neck dissection is difficult for surgeons. Thus, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) was proposed for RTCs. The aim of this prospective study is to assess RTC treatment response after RFA, according to well-established criteria. METHODS: Sixteen lesions in 13 patients were treated by RFA. All patients refused/were excluded from repeated surgery or other conventional therapy. CT and US examinations were performed before RFA to evaluate lesion volume and vascularization. All RFA procedures were performed under US-guidance by an 18-gauge, electrode. Treatment response was evaluated by CT, according to RECIST 1.1 and to mRECIST guidelines; CT examinations were performed during follow-up (6-18 months); the volume of residual vital tumour tissue and the percentage of necrotic tissue were estimated by contrast enhanced CT. RESULTS: RFA was well tolerated by all patients; in two cases laryngeal nerve paralysis was observed. Mean pre-treatment volume was 4.18 ± 3.53 ml. Vital tumour tissue and percentage of necrosis at 6, 12 and 18 months were 0.18 ± 0.25, 0.11 ± 0.13, 0.29 ± 0.40 ml and 91.9 ± 11.1, 90.4 ± 13.3, 80.8 ± 23.1%. According to RECIST 1.1, target lesion response was classified as complete response (CR) in one case, partial response (PR) in 11/16, stable disease in 4/16 cases. According to mRECIST, 11/16 cases were classified as CR and the remaining 5 as PR. CONCLUSION: RFA is a safe procedure to treat the viable tumour tissue and to reduce the RTC volume; as to the criteria to assess treatment response, mRECIST appears to be more accurate.

Use of robotic colonoscopy in patients with previous incomplete colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: Conventional colonoscopy (CC) is the gold standard to diagnostic and therapeutic approach to colon. However, in few cases, cecal intubation could fail due to colon anatomy, patient compliance and physician expertise. Endotics robotic colonoscopy is a novel, safe, mini-invasive modality to explore the entire colon. Our aim was to assess, in a retrospective study, Endotics ability of cecal intubation in all cases in which CC failed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2012, 276 Endotics robotic colonscopy examinations were performed at the Gastroenterology and Metabolic Diseases Unit of Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy, in a series of consecutive patients who had undergone CC and failed cecal intubation. RESULTS: We assessed the cecal intubation rate in 102 patients addressed to Endotics after previous incomplete CC. Overall, endotics system was successful in 93.1% of the incomplete conventional colonoscopy cases (95% performance). CONCLUSIONS: Whenever the intended exploration of the entire colon with CC failed, the endotics robotic endoscopy represented a useful tool as it helped examine the entire colon in almost all cases.