Literature DB >> 19594374

Bowel displacement for CT-guided tumor radiofrequency ablation: techniques and anatomic considerations.

Daniel T Ginat1, Wael Saad, Mark Davies, David Walman, Erdal Erturk.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To describe safety and efficacy of bowel displacement techniques and determine lesion characteristics that are likely to necessitate bowel displacement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent CT-guided renal tumor radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (January 2006-August 2008) was conducted. Techniques included hydrodissection, additional manual torquing of the RFA probe, and additional angioplasty balloon interposition. The goal was to displace bowel from the probe by at least 10 to 20 mm. Air-filled balloon interposition was intended as a thermal barrier. Pre- and postbowel displacement distances were measured by CT. Saline volumes were recorded. Multivariate stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the influence of laterality, renal location, and morphology of renal lesions on their proximity to the colon and use of bowel displacement techniques.
RESULTS: RFA was performed on 57 consecutive patients. Eleven (19%) patients had bowel displacement attempts. Median pre-RFA lesion edge to colon distance for nondisplaced vs displaced was 43 mm (range 10-100 mm) vs 6 mm (range 0-16 mm), respectively (P < 0.05). Two variables were significant for bowel displacement (F-ratio = 4.681, P = 0.006): Tumor position within the kidney in the craniocaudal plane (P = 0.014) and anterior-posterior plane (P = 0.007). Lower pole and posterior lesions tended to be closer to the colon and more likely to necessitate bowel displacement. Orientation in the medial-lateral plane (P = 0.77) and exophytic nature of the lesion (P = 0.83) were not significant features. Hydrostatic bowel displacement was always the first-line technique and was completely and partly successful in 8 (73%) and 1 (9%) attempts, respectively. Partial success was augmented by probe torquing (distance increased from 1 mm to 16 mm and then to 23 mm with torquing). Mean saline injection: 105 mL (range 55-440 mL). There were two complete failures (18%) in which bowel was displaced only by 0 to 2 mm despite injection of 280 to 440 mL. Balloon interposition was attempted in these two cases. Five minor complications occurred in the nondisplaced cohort. No complications occurred in the bowel displacement cohort.
CONCLUSION: Lower pole, posterior renal lesions are more likely to necessitate bowel displacement. Bowel displacement techniques are effective and safe in displacing bowel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19594374     DOI: 10.1089/end.2008.0668

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  10 in total

1.  Thermoablation of Renal Masses: The Urologist's Perspective.

Authors:  Phillip H Abbosh; Sam B Bhayani
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.513

Review 2.  Virtually no thoracic lesion inaccessible: a pictorial case review.

Authors:  Bradley B Pua; David Li; Brian W Sullivan; David C Madoff
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.513

3.  Fibrillar collagen injection for organ protection during thermal ablation of hepatic malignancies.

Authors:  Bill S Majdalany; Jonathan Willatt; Jeffrey Forris Beecham Chick; Ravi N Srinivasa; Wael A Saad
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2017 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.630

Review 4.  Laparoscopic and image-guided radiofrequency ablation of renal tumors: patient selection and outcomes.

Authors:  Scott M Castle; Vladislav Gorbatiy; Obi Ekwenna; Raymond J Leveillee
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Ablative therapies for renal tumors.

Authors:  Rajan Ramanathan; Raymond J Leveillee
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2010-04

6.  Contrast media-doped hydrodissection during thermal ablation: optimizing contrast media concentration for improved visibility on CT images.

Authors:  Calista Campbell; Meghan G Lubner; J Louis Hinshaw; Alejandro Muñoz del Rio; Christopher L Brace
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 3.959

7.  Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of a small renal mass complicated by appendiceal perforation.

Authors:  Judith Boone; Axel Bex; Warner Prevoo
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2011-10-20       Impact factor: 2.740

8.  Thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases: a position paper by an international panel of ablation experts, The Interventional Oncology Sans Frontières meeting 2013.

Authors:  Alice Gillams; Nahum Goldberg; Muneeb Ahmed; Reto Bale; David Breen; Matthew Callstrom; Min Hua Chen; Byung Ihn Choi; Thierry de Baere; Damian Dupuy; Afshin Gangi; Debra Gervais; Thomas Helmberger; Ernst-Michael Jung; Fred Lee; Riccardo Lencioni; Ping Liang; Tito Livraghi; David Lu; Franca Meloni; Philippe Pereira; Fabio Piscaglia; Hyunchul Rhim; Riad Salem; Constantinos Sofocleous; Stephen B Solomon; Michael Soulen; Masatoshi Tanaka; Thomas Vogl; Brad Wood; Luigi Solbiati
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-22       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Complications of ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation of renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Xuejuan Dong; Xin Li; Jie Yu; Ming-An Yu; Xiaoling Yu; Ping Liang
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Tips and tricks for a safe and effective image-guided percutaneous renal tumour ablation.

Authors:  Giovanni Mauri; L Nicosia; G M Varano; G Bonomo; P Della Vigna; L Monfardini; F Orsi
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2017-05-12
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.