Alexander Massmann1, Roland Seidel2, Günther K Schneider2, Arno Buecker2, Peter Fries2. 1. Clinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Saarland University Medical Center, Kirrberger Straße, Gebäude 50.1, 66421, Homburg, Germany. Alexander.Massmann@uks.eu. 2. Clinic for Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Saarland University Medical Center, Kirrberger Straße, Gebäude 50.1, 66421, Homburg, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate technical feasibility and safety of endovascular tumor specimen sampling using an escalating endovascular biopsy strategy using a directional atherectomy device compared with forceps biopsy and catheter aspiration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2013 and 2017, a cohort of ten consecutive patients (6 male; median age 56, range 39-73 years) was referred for sampling of endovascular masses. Localizations included the abdominal aorta (n = 4), left brachiocephalic vein (n = 2), inferior vena cava (n = 1), and left pulmonary artery (n = 3). For each individual mass, all three endovascular tissue sampling approaches were applied including catheter-based aspiration, straight two-jaw biopsy forceps, and directional atherectomy during a single session. RESULTS: Aspiration and forceps biopsy did not provide sufficient material for histological analyses. In contrast, technical success for endovascular tumor sampling using directional atherectomy was 100%. After two atherectomy passages, sufficient material was available for each vessel region allowing histologic diagnosis, which revealed sarcoma and chronic inflammation for masses in the aorta, angiosarcoma for brachiocephalic vein, hepatocellular carcinoma for inferior vena cava, and angiosarcoma for pulmonary artery. In case of a histologically benign diagnosis, no malignant tumor proliferation was obvious on follow-up imaging studies after 3 months and 1 year. Thus, the rate of false-negative results was considered 0%. No procedure-associated complications, e.g., vessel perforation, were recorded. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results in a limited number of patients proved directional atherectomy beneficial as a safe and feasible technique for endoluminal tissue sampling of vascular masses. Additional large-scale studies are necessary and worthy for further evaluation in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: • Endovascular masses pose a challenge to appropriate clinical management. • Off-label directional atherectomy proved to be a safe and feasible technique for endoluminal tissue sampling of vascular masses. Furthermore, directional atherectomy was superior to aspiration or forceps biopsy in our small study cohort. • Directional atherectomy may represent the last or only option for tissue probing as a prerequisite for further treatment decisions.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate technical feasibility and safety of endovascular tumor specimen sampling using an escalating endovascular biopsy strategy using a directional atherectomy device compared with forceps biopsy and catheter aspiration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2013 and 2017, a cohort of ten consecutive patients (6 male; median age 56, range 39-73 years) was referred for sampling of endovascular masses. Localizations included the abdominal aorta (n = 4), left brachiocephalic vein (n = 2), inferior vena cava (n = 1), and left pulmonary artery (n = 3). For each individual mass, all three endovascular tissue sampling approaches were applied including catheter-based aspiration, straight two-jaw biopsy forceps, and directional atherectomy during a single session. RESULTS: Aspiration and forceps biopsy did not provide sufficient material for histological analyses. In contrast, technical success for endovascular tumor sampling using directional atherectomy was 100%. After two atherectomy passages, sufficient material was available for each vessel region allowing histologic diagnosis, which revealed sarcoma and chronic inflammation for masses in the aorta, angiosarcoma for brachiocephalic vein, hepatocellular carcinoma for inferior vena cava, and angiosarcoma for pulmonary artery. In case of a histologically benign diagnosis, no malignant tumor proliferation was obvious on follow-up imaging studies after 3 months and 1 year. Thus, the rate of false-negative results was considered 0%. No procedure-associated complications, e.g., vessel perforation, were recorded. CONCLUSION: Preliminary results in a limited number of patients proved directional atherectomy beneficial as a safe and feasible technique for endoluminal tissue sampling of vascular masses. Additional large-scale studies are necessary and worthy for further evaluation in clinical practice. KEY POINTS: • Endovascular masses pose a challenge to appropriate clinical management. • Off-label directional atherectomy proved to be a safe and feasible technique for endoluminal tissue sampling of vascular masses. Furthermore, directional atherectomy was superior to aspiration or forceps biopsy in our small study cohort. • Directional atherectomy may represent the last or only option for tissue probing as a prerequisite for further treatment decisions.
Authors: F Castaneda; G Moradian; D Hunter; W Castaneda-Zuniga; K Amplatz Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 1989 Nov-1990 Dec Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Angelina S June; Donald G Harris; Christine Yoo; Danon Garrido; Shahab Toursavadkohi; Rajabrata Sarkar; Robert S Crawford Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2016-09-23 Impact factor: 1.466