F H Cornelis1,2, F Marin3, C Labrèze4, V Pinsolle5, Y Le Bras3, D Midy6, N Grenier3. 1. Department of Radiology, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux, France. cornelisfrancois@gmail.com. 2. Department of Radiology, Tenon Hospital, APHP, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France. cornelisfrancois@gmail.com. 3. Department of Radiology, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux, France. 4. Department of Pediatric Dermatology, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux, France. 5. Department of Aesthetic Surgery, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux, France. 6. Department of Vascular Surgery, Pellegrin Hospital, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report the mid-term outcomes of percutaneous cryoablation (PCA) performed as second-line therapeutic option of venous malformations (VM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: From 2011 to 2015, PCA was offered in 24 patients (mean age: 31 years, range: 12-64) as second-line treatment for recurrence of symptoms after sclerotherapy and when resection was not possible (due to lesion location or previous failure) or refused by the patient. Adverse effects were recorded, disease-free survival (DFS) and local tissue control (LTC) rates were calculated based on symptoms and volume evolution. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 18.7 months (6-48). Nine (37.5%, 9/24) adverse effects occurred and three (12.5%, 3/24) were severe. Mean pain assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) was 41.7 mm (0-80) before treatment and 20.3 mm (0-80) (p=0.01) after. Mean volume decreased significantly after treatment from 22.4 cm3 (0.9-146) to 8.35 cm3 (0-81.3) (p<0.001). Pain recurred in nine patients and size of one lesion increased. The DFS and LTC rates were 54% [95%CI: 22.94-77.27] and 93.33% [61.26-99.03] at 24 months, respectively. Only VM volume >10 cm3 was associated with a higher risk of local recurrence (p=0.05). CONCLUSION: PCA as second-line treatment appears to be safe and effective for local control of VM according to mid-term results. KEY POINTS: • Percutaneous cryoablation of venous malformations appeared well tolerated. • Size of venous malformations decreased significantly after percutaneous cryoablation (p<0.001). • Pain decreased significantly after percutaneous cryoablation of venous malformations (p=0.01).
PURPOSE: To report the mid-term outcomes of percutaneous cryoablation (PCA) performed as second-line therapeutic option of venous malformations (VM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: From 2011 to 2015, PCA was offered in 24 patients (mean age: 31 years, range: 12-64) as second-line treatment for recurrence of symptoms after sclerotherapy and when resection was not possible (due to lesion location or previous failure) or refused by the patient. Adverse effects were recorded, disease-free survival (DFS) and local tissue control (LTC) rates were calculated based on symptoms and volume evolution. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 18.7 months (6-48). Nine (37.5%, 9/24) adverse effects occurred and three (12.5%, 3/24) were severe. Mean pain assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) was 41.7 mm (0-80) before treatment and 20.3 mm (0-80) (p=0.01) after. Mean volume decreased significantly after treatment from 22.4 cm3 (0.9-146) to 8.35 cm3 (0-81.3) (p<0.001). Pain recurred in nine patients and size of one lesion increased. The DFS and LTC rates were 54% [95%CI: 22.94-77.27] and 93.33% [61.26-99.03] at 24 months, respectively. Only VM volume >10 cm3 was associated with a higher risk of local recurrence (p=0.05). CONCLUSION: PCA as second-line treatment appears to be safe and effective for local control of VM according to mid-term results. KEY POINTS: • Percutaneous cryoablation of venous malformations appeared well tolerated. • Size of venous malformations decreased significantly after percutaneous cryoablation (p<0.001). • Pain decreased significantly after percutaneous cryoablation of venous malformations (p=0.01).
Authors: M Havez; N Lippa; S Al-Ammari; M Kind; E Stoeckle; A Italiano; A Gangi; O Hauger; F Cornelis Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Julie Maillot; Jean Luc Brun; Vincent Dubuisson; Marc Bazot; Nicolas Grenier; François H Cornelis Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-04-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Carine J M van der Vleuten; Anne Kater; Marc H W A Wijnen; Leo J Schultze Kool; Maroeska M Rovers Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Raja S Ramaswamy; Tatulya Tiwari; Michael D Darcy; Seung K Kim; Olaguoke Akinwande; Niloy Dasgupta; Carlos J Guevara Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 2.630