Giansante Louise, McDonagh Ed, Basso Jodie, Haris Arafat, Kc Sajjan, Withey Samuel J, Shur Joshua, Fotiadis Nicos, Goldberg S Nahum, Johnston Edward W
Joint Dept. of Physics, The Royal Marsden, 203 Fulham Road, London, SW36JJ, UK.
Department of Radiotherapy and Imaging, Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2025 May;48(5):643-652. doi: 10.1007/s00270-024-03948-x. Epub 2025 Jan 9.
Contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) may be performed immediately following microwave liver ablation for assessment of ablative margins. However, practices and protocols vary among institutions. Here, we compare a standardized bolus-tracked biphasic CECT protocol and compare this with a single venous phase fixed delay protocol for ablation zone (AZ) assessment.
An institutional review board approved study performed at a specialist cancer centre. A prospective cohort of patients undergoing bolus-tracked biphasic imaging was compared with a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent fixed delay venous phase imaging. AZ conspicuity and segmentation quality were semi-quantitatively scored using Five-point Likert scales. Time between ablation and image acquisition was recorded for each AZ and was correlated to AZ conspicuity and segmentation quality.
Forty patients, median age 59 years (IQR 48-66 years), 24 men, underwent microwave ablation of 68 liver tumours. AZ conspicuity was higher in the bolus-tracked (n = 33) vs. fixed delay (n = 35) cohorts, 4.5 vs. 2.5, P < 0.0001. Commensurate segmentation quality was also higher, 5.0 vs. 3.0 respectively, P < 0.0001. Ordinal regression showed that image quality scores declined by 3-4% for each minute that passes after ablation, particularly for arterial phase images, where regression coefficients were - 0.04, P = 0.007, and -0.03, P = 0.012 for conspicuity and segmentation quality, respectively.
Bolus-tracked biphasic contrast-enhanced CT protocols improve both conspicuity and semi-automatic segmentation quality of microwave liver ablation zones, particularly if imaged soon after ablation.
EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE: Level 2b; exploratory prospective cohort study.
微波肝脏消融术后可立即进行对比增强CT(CECT)以评估消融边缘。然而,各机构的做法和方案各不相同。在此,我们比较了一种标准化的团注追踪双期CECT方案,并将其与用于消融区(AZ)评估的单静脉期固定延迟方案进行比较。
在一家专业癌症中心进行了一项经机构审查委员会批准的研究。将接受团注追踪双期成像的前瞻性队列患者与接受固定延迟静脉期成像的回顾性队列患者进行比较。使用五点李克特量表对AZ的清晰度和分割质量进行半定量评分。记录每个AZ从消融到图像采集的时间,并将其与AZ的清晰度和分割质量相关联。
40例患者,中位年龄59岁(四分位间距48 - 66岁),24例男性,接受了68个肝脏肿瘤的微波消融。团注追踪组(n = 33)的AZ清晰度高于固定延迟组(n = 35),分别为4.5和2.5,P < 0.0001。相应的分割质量也更高,分别为5.0和3.0,P < 0.0001。有序回归显示,消融后每过一分钟,图像质量评分下降3 - 4%,特别是动脉期图像,清晰度和分割质量的回归系数分别为-0.04,P = 0.007和-0.03,P = 0.012。
团注追踪双期对比增强CT方案可提高微波肝脏消融区的清晰度和半自动分割质量,尤其是在消融后不久进行成像时。
2b级;探索性前瞻性队列研究。