| Literature DB >> 27357928 |
Leonora S F Boogerd1, Henricus J M Handgraaf1, Hwai-Ding Lam1, Volkert A L Huurman1, Arantza Farina-Sarasqueta2, John V Frangioni3,4,5, Cornelis J H van de Velde1, Andries E Braat1, Alexander L Vahrmeijer6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tumor recurrence after radical resection of hepatic tumors is not uncommon, suggesting that malignant lesions are missed during surgery. Intraoperative navigation using fluorescence guidance is an innovative technique enabling real-time identification of (sub)capsular liver tumors. The objective of the current study was to compare fluorescence imaging (FI) and conventional imaging modalities for laparoscopic detection of both primary and metastatic tumors in the liver.Entities:
Keywords: Fluorescence imaging; Hepatic metastases; Indocyanine green; Intraoperative guidance; Surgical navigation; Tumor imaging
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27357928 PMCID: PMC5199623 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5007-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Surg Endosc ISSN: 0930-2794 Impact factor: 4.584
Patient characteristics
| Total patients, | 22 |
| Age at surgery, median [range] | 65 [28–76] |
| Gender, % ( | |
| Female | 45 [ |
| Male | 55 [ |
| BMI, median [range] | 23.0 [18.8–36.6] |
| ASA classification, % ( | |
| 1 | 9 [ |
| 2 | 82 (18) |
| 3 | 9 [ |
| 4 | 0 (0) |
| Liver cirrhosis, % ( | 14 [ |
| Neoadjuvant therapy, % ( | 27 [ |
Abbreviations ASA American Society of Anesthesiologists
Fig. 1Representative images of intraoperative NIR fluorescence identification of liver tumors. A well-differentiated hepatocellular carcinoma shows the uptake of ICG in and around the tumor. A cholangiocarcinoma shows a rim-type fluorescence, similar to hepatic metastasis of colorectal and breast cancer and uveal melanoma. As the breast cancer and uveal melanoma liver metastases are located below the liver surface, the fluorescence does not show a rim. However, ex vivo a distinctive rim-type fluorescence signal is visible (data not shown). Of note, the fluorescence laparoscope does not possess an overlay function; the images are therefore not always aligned
Characteristics of resected lesions
| Histopathological diagnosis |
| Size (mm) | Method of detection, | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | MRI | Insp | LUS | NIRF | LUS + NIRF | |||
| Malignant | ||||||||
| HCC | 3 | 45 [25–58] | 3/3 | 1/1 | 2/3 | 3/3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| ChC | 2 | 32 [30–33] | 1/1 | 1/1 | 2/2 | 2/2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| CRLM | 18 | 18 [1–35] | 14/18 | 11/14 | 10/18 | 15/18 | 17/18 | 18/18 |
| UMLM | 2 | 16 [14–18] | 2/2 | 2/2 | 1/2 | 2/2 | 1/2 | 2/2 |
| BCLM | 1 | 11 | 0/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Total | 26 | 20 [1–58] | 20/25 | 16/19 | 16/26 | 23/26 | 24/26 | 26/26 |
| Benign | ||||||||
| Adenoma | 1 | 20 | 1/1 | – | 1/1 | 1/1 | 0/1 | 1/1 |
| FNH | 1 | 84 | 1/1 | – | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Biliary adenofibroma | 1 | 18 | 1/1 | – | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Bile duct hamartoma | 6 | 4 [2–15] | 1/6 | 1/5 | 5/6 | 1/5 | 1/6 | 2/6 |
| Necrosis | 4 | 13 [8–37] | 2/4 | 2/4 | 3/4 | 2/4 | 3/4 | 3/4 |
| No lesion identifiedb | 2 | – | 1/2 | 1/2 | 1/2 | 0/2 | 0/2 | 0/2 |
| Otherc | 5 | – | 1/3 | 0/4 | 3/5 | 1/5 | 2/5 | 3/5 |
| Total | 20 | 13 [2–84] | 8/18 | 4/15 | 15/20 | 7/19 | 8/20 | 11/20 |
Abbreviations Insp. inspection, HCC hepatocellular carcinoma, ChC intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, CRLM colorectal liver metastasis, UMLM uveal melanoma liver metastasis, BCLM breast cancer liver metastasis, FNH focal nodular hyperplasia
aNot all lesions were imaged by all imaging modalities
bAfter gross examination, the pathologist could not identify any abnormal lesion in two specimens
cIncludes cholestasis, cirrhotic tissue, fibrosis, and steatosis
Fig. 2Sensitivity of all imaging modalities employed. Sensitivity and positive predictive value of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), visual inspection, laparoscopic ultrasonography (LUS), near-infrared fluorescence imaging (NIRF), and combination of LUS and NIRF. NIRF has the highest sensitivity rate among all imaging modalities. Combination of NIRF + LUS results in the detection of all hepatic tumors (100 % detection). The graph shows the sensitivity for all lesions together and divided into <10 and ≥10 mm. Sensitivity of all imaging modalities drops considerably for the detection of lesions <10 mm. However, all small lesions could still be detected by combining NIRF and LUS. Differences are not statistically significant
Fig. 3Ex vivo fluorescence imaging of resected tumors. Rim-type fluorescence surrounding a cholangiocarcinoma (ChC, A) and a colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM, B) imaged using a FLARE® prototype. The CRLM was not visible using fluorescence imaging during surgery, because it was located >8 mm below the liver surface. Matching microscopic images (magnification ×2 and ×40) of hematoxylin and eosin and DAPI staining sections were made of ChC (C) and CRLM (D). Fluorescence shows a sharp demarcation between normal liver tissue and fibrosis or tumor tissue. D Also shows fluorescence in a biliary duct, probably due to mechanic obstruction by the tumor. Abbreviations T tumor, F fibrosis, N normal liver tissue, B biliary duct
Fig. 4Fluorescence imaging of benign lesions. A Intraoperative imaging of a cyst (white arrow) and a bile duct hamartoma (dashed arrow). The cyst is not visible using fluorescence imaging, but the bile duct hamartoma is. The weak fluorescence signal does not show a distinctive rim-type fluorescence and can thereby be discriminated from a malignancy. B Benign, large focal nodular hyperplasia also shows NIR fluorescence. The mechanism of ICG uptake is unknown, but potentially its biliary excretion is disturbed
Fig. 5Intraoperative visualization of a positive resection margin of a colorectal liver metastasis. In vivo fluorescence is visible in the resection margin (white arrow), indicating a tumor-free margin of <8 mm. Ex vivo, the distinctive fluorescent rim is interrupted (dashed arrow) at the positive resection margin