Francois H Cornelis1,2, Helena Cindrič3, Bor Kos3, Masashi Fujimori1, Elena N Petre1, Damijan Miklavčič3, Stephen B Solomon1, Govindarajan Srimathveeravalli4,5. 1. Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA. 2. Tenon Hospital, ISCD, Sorbonne Université, 4 Rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France. 3. Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Tržaška 25, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia. 4. Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA. govind@umass.edu. 5. Institute for Applied Life Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 01003, USA. govind@umass.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of peri-tumoral metallic implants (MI) on the safety and efficacy of percutaneous irreversible electroporation (IRE) of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 25 patients (12 women, 13 men; MI: 13, no MI: 12) were treated for 29 CRLM. Patient characteristics, tumor location and size, treatment parameters and the presence of MI were evaluated as determinants of local tumor progression (LTP) with the competing risks model (univariate and multivariate analyses). Patient-specific computer models were created to examine the effect of the MI on the electric field used to induce IRE, probability of cell kill and potential thermal effects. RESULTS: Patients had a median follow-up of 25 months, during which no IRE-related major complications were reported. Univariate analysis showed that tumor size (> 2 cm), probe spacing (> 20 mm) and the presence of MI (p < 0.05) were significant predictors of time to LTP, but only the latter was found to be an independent predictor on multivariate analysis (sub-hazard ratio = 6.5; [95% CI 1.99, 21.4]; p = 0.002). The absence of peri-tumoral MI was associated with higher progression-free survival at 12 months (92.3% [56.6, 98.9] vs 12.5% [2.1, 32.8]). Computer simulations indicated significant distortions and reduction in electric field strength near MI, which could have contributed to under-treatment of the tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Peri-tumoral MI increases the risk of treatment failure following IRE of CRLM.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of peri-tumoral metallic implants (MI) on the safety and efficacy of percutaneous irreversible electroporation (IRE) of colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, 25 patients (12 women, 13 men; MI: 13, no MI: 12) were treated for 29 CRLM. Patient characteristics, tumor location and size, treatment parameters and the presence of MI were evaluated as determinants of local tumor progression (LTP) with the competing risks model (univariate and multivariate analyses). Patient-specific computer models were created to examine the effect of the MI on the electric field used to induce IRE, probability of cell kill and potential thermal effects. RESULTS:Patients had a median follow-up of 25 months, during which no IRE-related major complications were reported. Univariate analysis showed that tumor size (> 2 cm), probe spacing (> 20 mm) and the presence of MI (p < 0.05) were significant predictors of time to LTP, but only the latter was found to be an independent predictor on multivariate analysis (sub-hazard ratio = 6.5; [95% CI 1.99, 21.4]; p = 0.002). The absence of peri-tumoral MI was associated with higher progression-free survival at 12 months (92.3% [56.6, 98.9] vs 12.5% [2.1, 32.8]). Computer simulations indicated significant distortions and reduction in electric field strength near MI, which could have contributed to under-treatment of the tumor. CONCLUSIONS:Peri-tumoral MI increases the risk of treatment failure following IRE of CRLM.
Authors: Robert E Neal; Ryan L Smith; Helen Kavnoudias; Franklin Rosenfeldt; Ruchong Ou; Catriona A Mclean; Rafael V Davalos; Kenneth R Thomson Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Mihajlo Djokic; Maja Cemazar; Peter Popovic; Bor Kos; Rok Dezman; Masa Bosnjak; Martina Niksic Zakelj; Damijan Miklavcic; Stojan Potrc; Borut Stabuc; Ales Tomazic; Gregor Sersa; Blaz Trotovsek Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2018-02-02 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: D K Filippiadis; C Binkert; O Pellerin; R T Hoffmann; A Krajina; P L Pereira Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2017-06-05 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Christoph Niessen; Juliane Igl; Benedikt Pregler; Lukas Beyer; Ekaterina Noeva; Marco Dollinger; Andreas G Schreyer; Ernst M Jung; Christian Stroszczynski; Philipp Wiggermann Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2015-03-23 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Hester J Scheffer; Jantien A Vogel; Willemien van den Bos; Robert E Neal; Krijn P van Lienden; Marc G H Besselink; Martin J C van Gemert; Cees W M van der Geld; Martijn R Meijerink; John H Klaessens; Rudolf M Verdaasdonk Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Pierre Agnass; Eran van Veldhuisen; Jantien A Vogel; H Petra Kok; Mark J de Keijzer; Gerben Schooneveldt; Lianne R de Haan; John H Klaessens; Hester J Scheffer; Martijn R Meijerink; Krijn P van Lienden; Thomas M van Gulik; Michal Heger; Johannes Crezee; Marc G Besselink Journal: J Clin Transl Res Date: 2020-03-12