OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and prognostic value of 3D measuring of the ablation margins using a dedicated image registration software. METHODS: This retrospective study included 104 colorectal liver metastases in 68 consecutive patients that underwent microwave ablation between 08/2012 and 08/2019. The minimal ablation margin (MM) was measured in 2D using anatomic landmarks on contrast enhanced CT(CECT) 4-8 weeks post-ablation, and in 3D using an image registration software and immediate post-ablation CECT. Local tumor progression (LTP) was assessed by imaging up to 24 months after ablation. A blinded interventional radiologist provided feedback on the possibility of additional ablation after examining the 3D-margin measurements. RESULTS: The 3D-margin assessment was completed in 79/104 (76%) tumors without the need for target manipulation. In 25/104 (24%) tumors, manipulation was required due to image misregistration. LTP was observed in 40/104 (38.5%) tumors: 92.5% vs 7.5% for those with margin <5mm vs ≥5mm, respectively (p = 0.0001). The 2D and 3D-assessments identified margin <5mm in 17/104 (16%), and in 74/104 (71%) ablated tumors, respectively (p < 0.01). The sensitivity and specificity of the 3D software for predicting LTP was 93% (37/40) and 42% (27/64), respectively. Additional ablation to achieve a MM of 5 mm would have been offered in 26/37 cases if the 3D-margin assessment was available intraoperatively. CONCLUSION: Image registration software can measure ablation margins and detect MM under 5 mm intraoperatively, with significantly higher sensitivity than the 2D technique using landmarks on the post-ablation CECT. The identification of a margin under 5 mm is strongly associated with LTP.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and prognostic value of 3D measuring of the ablation margins using a dedicated image registration software. METHODS: This retrospective study included 104 colorectal liver metastases in 68 consecutive patients that underwent microwave ablation between 08/2012 and 08/2019. The minimal ablation margin (MM) was measured in 2D using anatomic landmarks on contrast enhanced CT(CECT) 4-8 weeks post-ablation, and in 3D using an image registration software and immediate post-ablation CECT. Local tumor progression (LTP) was assessed by imaging up to 24 months after ablation. A blinded interventional radiologist provided feedback on the possibility of additional ablation after examining the 3D-margin measurements. RESULTS: The 3D-margin assessment was completed in 79/104 (76%) tumors without the need for target manipulation. In 25/104 (24%) tumors, manipulation was required due to image misregistration. LTP was observed in 40/104 (38.5%) tumors: 92.5% vs 7.5% for those with margin <5mm vs ≥5mm, respectively (p = 0.0001). The 2D and 3D-assessments identified margin <5mm in 17/104 (16%), and in 74/104 (71%) ablated tumors, respectively (p < 0.01). The sensitivity and specificity of the 3D software for predicting LTP was 93% (37/40) and 42% (27/64), respectively. Additional ablation to achieve a MM of 5 mm would have been offered in 26/37 cases if the 3D-margin assessment was available intraoperatively. CONCLUSION: Image registration software can measure ablation margins and detect MM under 5 mm intraoperatively, with significantly higher sensitivity than the 2D technique using landmarks on the post-ablation CECT. The identification of a margin under 5 mm is strongly associated with LTP.
Entities:
Keywords:
Thermal ablation; ablation margin assessment; colorectal cancer liver metastases
Authors: Vlasios S Sotirchos; Sho Fujisawa; Efsevia Vakiani; Stephen B Solomon; Katia O Manova-Todorova; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-03-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Muneeb Ahmed; Luigi Solbiati; Christopher L Brace; David J Breen; Matthew R Callstrom; J William Charboneau; Min-Hua Chen; Byung Ihn Choi; Thierry de Baère; Gerald D Dodd; Damian E Dupuy; Debra A Gervais; David Gianfelice; Alice R Gillams; Fred T Lee; Edward Leen; Riccardo Lencioni; Peter J Littrup; Tito Livraghi; David S Lu; John P McGahan; Maria Franca Meloni; Boris Nikolic; Philippe L Pereira; Ping Liang; Hyunchul Rhim; Steven C Rose; Riad Salem; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Stephen B Solomon; Michael C Soulen; Masatoshi Tanaka; Thomas J Vogl; Bradford J Wood; S Nahum Goldberg Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-06-13 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marco Calandri; Suguru Yamashita; Carlo Gazzera; Paolo Fonio; Andrea Veltri; Sara Bustreo; Rahul A Sheth; Steven M Yevich; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Bruno C Odisio Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-02-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Ieva Kurilova; Achiude Bendet; Elena N Petre; Franz E Boas; Elena Kaye; Mithat Gonen; Anne Covey; Lynn A Brody; Karen T Brown; Nancy E Kemeny; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Etay Ziv; Michael I D'Angelica; T Peter Kingham; Andrea Cercek; Steven B Solomon; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: Clin Colorectal Cancer Date: 2020-10-24 Impact factor: 4.481
Authors: Gregor Laimer; Nikolai Jaschke; Peter Schullian; Daniel Putzer; Gernot Eberle; Marco Solbiati; Luigi Solbiati; S Nahum Goldberg; Reto Bale Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 5.315