Abstract
Objective: This study is to explore the efficacy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) / Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) fusion imaging-guided(fusion group)radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus conventional ultrasound imaging-guided (conventional group) RFA for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) in a short-term.
Methods: From December 2020 to December 2021, patients who underwent imaging-guided RFA of CRLM at our hospital with available CT/MRI images were enrolled consecutively. 22 patients with 46 lesions had undergone conventional group RFA whereas 29 patients with 63 lesions had undergone fusion group RFA. The lesion detection rate, technical success, local tumor progression (LTP) and complications were calculated.
Results: In this retrospective study, 51 patients with 130 lesions were diagnosed with CRLM. However, there were 12 lesions and 9 lesions invisible in the conventional group and fusion group, respectively. The lesion detection rate on the fusion imaging was significantly higher than on the US or CEUS in the fusion group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences of the detection rate between the conventional group and the fusion group (P=0.207). In both groups, the technical success rate was 100%. For local tumor progression (LTP), there were no significant differences between the two groups (P>0.05). The complications after ablation had no significant differences between the two groups (P=0.97).
Conclusion: CEUS/ Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI fusion imaging is a safe and effective method for RFA in the management of CRLM patients, and it may improve the therapeutic effect by detecting small lesions early.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ijc.29210] [PMID: 25220842]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492] [PMID: 30207593]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmgh.2017.01.006] [PMID: 28275683]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000128305.90650.71] [PMID: 15166961]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.4450] [PMID: 19841322]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2021.0012] [PMID: 33724754]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14132958] [PMID: 24927329]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.04.009] [PMID: 17618038]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2018.05.002] [PMID: 30292515]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01996-4] [PMID: 32828123]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.09.027] [PMID: 18996659]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-1812-9] [PMID: 20490505]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2012.05.004] [PMID: 22652037]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048681] [PMID: 23144927]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2664-9] [PMID: 27682648]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/CH-2012-1598] [PMID: 22960300]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000343070] [PMID: 23258098]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1325466] [PMID: 23238803]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.07.415] [PMID: 31447240]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2463/mrms.rev.2021-0031] [PMID: 34421091]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.8904] [PMID: 23436869]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06609-7] [PMID: 32002642]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.RVI.0000094584.83406.3e]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2005.07.022] [PMID: 16368496]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3779-z] [PMID: 25994193]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2730-7] [PMID: 23115006]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2658-0] [PMID: 22976920]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1586/17474124.2014.940897] [PMID: 25033964]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.04.1252] [PMID: 16632685]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.6039] [PMID: 22194485]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07579-x] [PMID: 33447860]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-012-0377-1] [PMID: 22535243]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.2079] [PMID: 17242258]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7397] [PMID: 21246516]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v23.i17.3111] [PMID: 28533668]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2019.1640899] [PMID: 31431086]