BACKGROUND: EUS-guided fiducial placement facilitates image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT). OBJECTIVE: To compare 2 types of commercially available fiducials for technical success, complications, visibility, and migration. DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center, comparative study. SETTING: Tertiary-care medical center. INTERVENTIONS: Traditional fiducials (TFs) (5-mm length, 0.8-mm diameter) and Visicoil fiducials (VFs) (10-mm length, 0.35-mm diameter) were compared. Fiducials were placed using linear 19-gauge (for TFs) or 22-gauge (for VFs) needles. A subjective visualization scoring system (0-2; 0 = not visible, 1 = barely visible, 2 = clearly visible) was used to assess visibility on CT. Fiducial migration was calculated as a change in interfiducial distance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Technical success, complications, visibility, and migration of 2 types of fiducials. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer underwent EUS-guided placement of 103 fiducials (77 TFs, 26 VFs). The mean number of fiducials placed per patient was 2.66 (standard deviation 0.67) for the 19-gauge needle and 2.60 (standard deviation 0.70) for the 22-gauge needle (P = .83). No intra- or postprocedural complications were encountered. The median visibility score for TFs was significantly better than that for VFs, both when scores of 0 were and were not included (2.00, interquartile range [IQR] 2.00-2.00 vs 1.75, IQR 1.50-2.00, P = .009 and 2.00, IQR 2.00-2.00 vs 2.00, IQR 1.50-2.00, P < .0001, respectively). The mean migration was not significantly different between the 2 types of fiducials (0.8 mm [IQR 0.4-1.6 mm] for TFs vs 1.3 mm [IQR 0.6-1.5 mm] for VFs; P = .72). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective, nonrandomized design. CONCLUSIONS: Visibility was significantly better for TFs compared with VFs. The degree of fiducial migration was not significantly different for TFs and VFs. There was no significant difference in the mean number of fiducials placed, indicating a similar degree of technical difficulty for TF and VF deployment.
BACKGROUND: EUS-guided fiducial placement facilitates image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT). OBJECTIVE: To compare 2 types of commercially available fiducials for technical success, complications, visibility, and migration. DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center, comparative study. SETTING: Tertiary-care medical center. INTERVENTIONS: Traditional fiducials (TFs) (5-mm length, 0.8-mm diameter) and Visicoil fiducials (VFs) (10-mm length, 0.35-mm diameter) were compared. Fiducials were placed using linear 19-gauge (for TFs) or 22-gauge (for VFs) needles. A subjective visualization scoring system (0-2; 0 = not visible, 1 = barely visible, 2 = clearly visible) was used to assess visibility on CT. Fiducial migration was calculated as a change in interfiducial distance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Technical success, complications, visibility, and migration of 2 types of fiducials. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer underwent EUS-guided placement of 103 fiducials (77 TFs, 26 VFs). The mean number of fiducials placed per patient was 2.66 (standard deviation 0.67) for the 19-gauge needle and 2.60 (standard deviation 0.70) for the 22-gauge needle (P = .83). No intra- or postprocedural complications were encountered. The median visibility score for TFs was significantly better than that for VFs, both when scores of 0 were and were not included (2.00, interquartile range [IQR] 2.00-2.00 vs 1.75, IQR 1.50-2.00, P = .009 and 2.00, IQR 2.00-2.00 vs 2.00, IQR 1.50-2.00, P < .0001, respectively). The mean migration was not significantly different between the 2 types of fiducials (0.8 mm [IQR 0.4-1.6 mm] for TFs vs 1.3 mm [IQR 0.6-1.5 mm] for VFs; P = .72). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective, nonrandomized design. CONCLUSIONS: Visibility was significantly better for TFs compared with VFs. The degree of fiducial migration was not significantly different for TFs and VFs. There was no significant difference in the mean number of fiducials placed, indicating a similar degree of technical difficulty for TF and VF deployment.
Authors: Daniel C Schiffner; Alexander R Gottschalk; Michael Lometti; Michele Aubin; Jean Pouliot; Joycelyn Speight; I-Chow Hsu; Katsuto Shinohara; Mack Roach Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Christopher J DiMaio; Satish Nagula; Karyn A Goodman; Alice Y Ho; Arnold J Markowitz; Mark A Schattner; Hans Gerdes Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: H A Burris; M J Moore; J Andersen; M R Green; M L Rothenberg; M R Modiano; M C Cripps; R K Portenoy; A M Storniolo; P Tarassoff; R Nelson; F A Dorr; C D Stephens; D D Von Hoff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-06 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: A M Henry; J Stratford; J Davies; C McCarthy; R Swindell; J Sykes; C J Moore; P Price; V S Khoo Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Albert C Koong; Erin Christofferson; Quynh-Thu Le; Karyn A Goodman; Anthony Ho; Timothy Kuo; James M Ford; George A Fisher; Ralph Greco; Jeffrey Norton; George P Yang Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-10-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: C G Moertel; S Frytak; R G Hahn; M J O'Connell; R J Reitemeier; J Rubin; A J Schutt; L H Weiland; D S Childs; M A Holbrook; P T Lavin; E Livstone; H Spiro; A Knowlton; M Kalser; J Barkin; H Lessner; R Mann-Kaplan; K Ramming; H O Douglas; P Thomas; H Nave; J Bateman; J Lokich; J Brooks; J Chaffey; J M Corson; N Zamcheck; J W Novak Journal: Cancer Date: 1981-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Shalini Moningi; Avani S Dholakia; Siva P Raman; Amanda Blackford; John L Cameron; Dung T Le; Ana M C De Jesus-Acosta; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Lauren M Rosati; Ryan K Assadi; Shirl Dipasquale; Timothy M Pawlik; Lei Zheng; Matthew J Weiss; Daniel A Laheru; Christopher L Wolfgang; Joseph M Herman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-01-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Leticia Perondi Luz; Mohammad Ali Al-Haddad; Michael Sai Lai Sey; John M DeWitt Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-06-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Carlo Fabbri; Carmelo Luigiano; Andrea Lisotti; Vincenzo Cennamo; Clara Virgilio; Giancarlo Caletti; Pietro Fusaroli Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-07-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Wei Zhao; Liyue Shen; Bin Han; Yong Yang; Kai Cheng; Diego A S Toesca; Albert C Koong; Daniel T Chang; Lei Xing Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Christopher L Wolfgang; Joseph M Herman; Daniel A Laheru; Alison P Klein; Michael A Erdek; Elliot K Fishman; Ralph H Hruban Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Avani Dholakia Rao; Eun Ji Shin; Jeffrey Meyer; Elizabeth L Thompson; Wei Fu; Chen Hu; Elliot K Fishman; Matthew Weiss; Christopher Wolfgang; Richard Burkhart; Jin He; Tossapol Kerdsirichairat; Joseph M Herman; Kai Ding; Amol Narang Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2020-03-07