Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Prophylactic Medication during Radioembolization in Metastatic Liver Disease: Is It Really Necessary? A Retrospective Cohort Study and Systematic Review of the Literature.
Braat, Manon N G J A; Ebbers, Sander C; Alsultan, Ahmed A; Neek, Atal O; Bruijnen, Rutger C G; Smits, Maarten L J; de Bruijne, Joep; Lam, Marnix G E H; Braat, Arthur J A T.
Afiliación
  • Braat MNGJA; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Ebbers SC; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Alsultan AA; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Neek AO; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Bruijnen RCG; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Smits MLJ; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • de Bruijne J; Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Lam MGEH; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Braat AJAT; Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Diagnostics (Basel) ; 13(24)2023 Dec 12.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38132236
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Trans-arterial radioembolization is a well-studied tumoricidal treatment for liver malignancies; however, consensus and evidence regarding periprocedural prophylactic medication (PPM) are lacking.

METHODS:

A single-center retrospective analysis from 2014 to 2020 was performed in patients treated with 90Y-glass microspheres for neuroendocrine or colorectal liver metastases. Inclusion criteria were the availability of at least 3 months of clinical, biochemical, and imaging follow-up and post-treatment 90Y-PET/CT imaging for the determination of the whole non-tumorous liver absorbed dose (Dh). Logistic regression models were used to investigate if variables (among which are P/UDCA and Dh) were associated with either clinical toxicity, biochemical toxicity, or hepatotoxicity. Additionally, a structured literature search was performed in November 2022 to identify all publications related to PPM use in radioembolization treatments.

RESULTS:

Fifty-one patients received P/UDCA as post-treatment medication, while 19 did not. No correlation was found between toxicity and P/UDCA use. Dh was associated with biochemical toxicity (p = 0.05). A literature review resulted in eight relevant articles, including a total of 534 patients, in which no consistent advice regarding PPM was provided.

CONCLUSION:

In this single-center, retrospective review, P/UDCA use did not reduce liver toxicity in patients with metastatic liver disease. The whole non-tumorous liver-absorbed dose was the only significant factor for hepatotoxicity. No standardized international guidelines or supporting evidence exist for PPM in radioembolization.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Diagnostics (Basel) Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Países Bajos Pais de publicación: Suiza

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Diagnostics (Basel) Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Países Bajos Pais de publicación: Suiza