Manual versus automated image fusion of real-time ultrasonography and MR/CT images for radiofrequency ablation of hepatic tumors: results of a randomized prospective trial (NCT02705118).

PURPOSE

This study compared the technical parameters and clinical outcomes of manual and automatic image fusion techniques of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatic tumors.

METHODS

Seventy consecutive patients (male:female=47:23, 67.1±10.9 years old) who underwent RFA for hepatic tumors were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned to the manual or automatic registration group. Two operators performed RFA with one of two imaging fusion techniques. Technical parameters (the registration error, time required for image registration, number of point registrations) and clinical outcomes (technical success, technical effectiveness, local tumor progression [LTP]-free survival, and progression-free survival [PFS]) were compared.

RESULTS

The automatic group contained 35 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, while the manual group included 34 hepatocellular carcinoma patients and a patient with colon cancer liver metastasis. The registration error, time required for registration, and number of point registrations were 5.7±4.3 mm, 147.8±78.2 seconds, and 3.26±1.20 in the automatic group, and 6.3±5.0 mm, 150.3±89.7 seconds, and 3.20±1.13 in the manual group, respectively. The technical success and effectiveness rates were both 97.1% in the automatic group and both 100.0% in the manual group. The above differences were not significant. The LTP-free survival and PFS (28.3 and 21.2 months in the automatic group, and 29.0 and 24.9 months in the manual group, respectively) showed no significant between-group differences during a median 20.1-month follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The technical parameters and clinical outcomes of automatic image fusion were not significantly different from those of manual image fusion for RFA of hepatic tumors.