Kitchin Douglas, Lubner Meghan, Ziemlewicz Tim, Hinshaw J Louis, Alexander Marci, Brace Christopher L, Lee Fred
Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin , Madison, Wisconsin , USA.
Int J Hyperthermia. 2014 Aug;30(5):299-305. doi: 10.3109/02656736.2014.936050.
Theaim of this peper was to retrospectively review our experience utilising protective fluid instillation techniques during percutaneous microwave ablation of liver tumours to determine if fluid instillation prevents non-target injuries and allows a more aggressive case selection.
This institute review board-approved, U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, retrospective study reviewed percutaneous microwave ablation of 151 malignant hepatic tumours in 87 patients, comparing cases in which protective fluid instillation was performed with those where no fluid was utilised. In cases utilising hydrodisplacement for bowel protection, a consensus panel evaluated eligibility for potential ablation without hydrodisplacement. Patient age, tumour size, local tumour progression rate, length of follow-up, complications, displacement distance/artificial ascites thickness, and treatment power/time were compared.
Fluid administration was utilised during treatment in 29/151 of cases: 10/29 for protection of bowel (8/10 cases not possible without fluid displacement), and 19/29 for body wall/diaphragm protection. Local tumour progression was higher when hydrodisplacement was used to protect bowel tissue; this may be due to lower applied power due to operator caution. Local tumour progression was not increased for artificial ascites. There was no difference in complications between the fluid group and controls.
Intraperitoneal fluid administration is a safe and effective method of protecting non-target structures during percutaneous hepatic microwave ablation. While hydrodisplacement for bowel protection allows more aggressive case selection, these cases were associated with higher rates of local tumour progression.
本文旨在回顾性分析我们在经皮微波消融肝肿瘤过程中使用保护性液体灌注技术的经验,以确定液体灌注是否能预防非靶区损伤并允许更积极的病例选择。
本研究经机构审查委员会批准,符合美国《健康保险流通与责任法案》,为回顾性研究,分析了87例患者的151个恶性肝肿瘤的经皮微波消融情况,比较了进行保护性液体灌注的病例与未使用液体的病例。在使用水分离法保护肠道的病例中,一个共识小组评估了不进行水分离法而进行潜在消融的资格。比较了患者年龄、肿瘤大小、局部肿瘤进展率、随访时间、并发症、移位距离/人工腹水厚度以及治疗功率/时间。
151例病例中有29例在治疗期间使用了液体灌注:29例中的10例用于保护肠道(10例中有8例不进行液体移位则无法进行),29例中的19例用于保护体壁/膈肌。使用水分离法保护肠道组织时局部肿瘤进展较高;这可能是由于操作者谨慎导致施加的功率较低。人工腹水组局部肿瘤进展未增加。液体灌注组与对照组在并发症方面无差异。
腹腔内液体灌注是经皮肝微波消融过程中保护非靶区结构的一种安全有效的方法。虽然使用水分离法保护肠道可允许更积极的病例选择,但这些病例的局部肿瘤进展率较高。