Efficacy and safety analysis of dexamethasone-lipiodol emulsion in prevention of post-embolization syndrome after TACE: a retrospective analysis

Dexamethasone-Based Prophylactic Therapy for Prevention of Post-Embolization Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Assessing Its Efficacy and Influence of Dosage and Timing in Patients Undergoing Arterial Embolization

BACKGROUND

Postembolization syndrome (PES), characterized by pain, fever, nausea, and vomiting, is a common but nonserious adverse event following arterial embolization, negatively impacting patient satisfaction with the procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone-based prophylactic therapy in preventing PES, as well as to assess the effects of its dosage and timing of administration.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted across 3 databases, 2 trial registries, and citation searches to identify relevant studies. Data related to postoperative pain, fever, nausea, and vomiting were extracted and meta-analyzed using a random-effects model and the Mantel-Haenszel method. Meta-regression was performed to examine the role of dexamethasone dose and timing of administration as mediators.

RESULTS

Dexamethasone-based prophylactic therapy significantly reduced the risk of postoperative pain (risk ratio (RR) = 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48-0.69; P < 0.00001), fever (RR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.22-0.61; P < 0.00001), nausea (RR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.41-0.67; P < 0.00001), and vomiting (RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.36-0.82; P = 0.004) compared to placebo or no treatment. A higher dose of dexamethasone was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative pain (P = 0.038). Regarding timing, postoperative and continuous (extending throughout the perioperative period) administration, was more effective than preoperative administration (P = 0.024; P = 0.007). A dosage of 6-12 mg was particularly effective in reducing the risk for all 4 symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone effectively prevents PES in patients undergoing arterial embolization. An optimal protocol may involve a divided dose regimen within the range of 6-12 mg, extending throughout the recovery period for maximum benefit.

Dexamethasone improves clinical and biological tolerance of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is widely used for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment but side effects hamper tolerance. Dexamethasone reduces TACE side effects in patients with viral hepatitis, but data regarding alcohol and metabolic liver diseases are lacking. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dexamethasone in preventing TACE-associated adverse events in European populations with predominantly alcoholic and metabolic cirrhosis.

METHODS

All cirrhotic patients undergoing TACE in our center between 2017 and 2021 were included. Dexamethasone was added to our protocol from 2019. Using a quasi-experimental study design, patients before and after introduction of dexamethasone in our procedure were compared. Factors associated with TACE adverse events were assessed by univariate and multivariate analysis. A sensitivity analysis was performed using propensity scores for covariate adjustment.

RESULTS

234 patients undergoing 398 TACE procedure were included. Cirrhosis was predominantly of alcohol or metabolic etiology (86.7 %). Dexamethasone was administered in 99 procedures (24.9 %). Incidence of fever and encephalopathy at day 2 after TACE was lower in the Dexamethasone group (p < 0.001; p = 0.02 respectively). In multivariate analysis, dexamethasone was associated with lower occurrence of fever (OR=0.03; p < 0.001), lower analgesics use (OR=0.11; p = 0.002), milder liver and kidney function impairment (OR=0.98; p = 0.001 and OR=0.94; p < 0.001 for bilirubin and creatinine variation respectively). Propensity score-adjusted analyses yielded similar results.

CONCLUSION

Dexamethasone improves TACE tolerance in a population of predominantly metabolic and alcohol cirrhosis.

Enhancing global hepatocellular carcinoma management: Bridging Eastern and Western perspectives on dexamethasone and N-acetylcysteine before transarterial chemoembolization

This article explores the integration of Eastern and Western perspectives on the use of dexamethasone and N-acetylcysteine as premedications in transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). By examining key concerns raised by Western researchers, particularly regarding the different etiologies of liver cirrhosis, and contrasting them with robust clinical data from Asia, this article highlights the necessity for region-specific research and proposes future directions for global HCC management.

Predictors and risk factors of bile duct injury after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma

PURPOSE

Bile duct injury is a serious complication after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE). If it is not detected early and treated actively, it will not only affect the subsequent tumor-related treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients, but also may lead to serious consequences such as infection, liver failure and even death. To analyze the risk factors of bile duct injury after TACE in patients with HCC and explore the predictive indicators of bile duct injury after TACE, which is helpful for doctors to detect and intervene early and avoid the occurrence of serious complications.

METHOD

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 847 patients with primary hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent TACE for the first time in our interventional department. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether bile duct injury occurred after TACE: (1) bile duct injury group, N = 55; (2) no bile duct injury group, N = 792. The basic data, intraoperative conditions and the outcome of bile duct injury were analyzed. The chi-square test was used for comparison of enumeration data. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison of measurement data. Risk factor analysis was performed using binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Basic data and intraoperative conditions were compared between the bile duct injury group and the group without bile duct injury: preoperative alkaline phosphatase (ALP) (103.24 ± 32.77U/L vs. 89.17 ± 37.35U/L, P = 0.003); history of hepatobiliary surgery (36.4% vs. 20.8%, P = 0.011); intraoperative lipiodol volume (P = 0.007); combined use of gelatin sponge particles (65.5% vs. 35.0%, P < 0.001); hypovascularity (58.2% vs. 24.5%, P < 0.001); and embolization site (P < 0.001). Comparison of postoperative liver function between bile duct injury group and non-bile duct injury group: postoperative total bilirubin (43.34 ± 25.18umol/L vs. 21.94 ± 9.82umol/L, P < 0.001); postoperative γ-glutamyltransferase(GGT) (188.09 ± 55.62U/L vs. 84.04 ± 36.47U/L, P < 0.001); postoperative ALP(251.51 ± 61.51U/L vs. 99.92 ± 45.98U/L, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The dosage of lipiodol in TACE, supplementation of gelatin sponge particles, embolization site, and hypovascularity of the tumor are risk factors for biliary duct injury after TACE. After TACE, GGT and ALP increased ≥ 2 times compared with preoperative indicators as predictors of bile duct injury. Bile duct injury occurring after TACE can achieve good outcomes with aggressive management.

Safety, efficacy, and survival of different transarterial chemoembolization techniques in the management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative single-center analysis

PURPOSE

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has become the standard of care for the treatment of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, current clinical practice guidelines lack consensus on the best selection of a specific TACE technique. This study aims to compare safety, tumor response, and progression-free survival (PFS) of conventional TACE (cTACE), drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE), and degradable starch microsphere TACE (DSM-TACE).

METHODS

This retrospective study included n = 192 patients with HCC who underwent first TACE with unbiased follow-up at 4-6 weeks at our center between 2008 and 2021. Eligibility for TACE was BCLC intermediate stage B, bridging/down-staging (B/D) to liver transplantation (LT), or any other stage when patients were not suitable for resection, LT, local ablation, or systemic therapy. Patients were grouped into three cohorts (n = 45 cTACE, n = 84 DEB-TACE, n = 63 DSM-TACE), and further categorized by TACE indication (B/D or palliative). Liver function and adverse events, response assessed by the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (mRECIST) 4-6 weeks post-TACE and PFS were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in age, gender distribution, BCLC stage, or etiology of liver disease among the three TACE groups, even in the B/D or palliative subgroups. DEB-TACE induced slight increases in bilirubin in the palliative subgroup and in lactate dehydrogenase in the entire cohort 4-6 weeks post-TACE, and more adverse events in the palliative subgroup. DEB-TACE and DSM-TACE showed significantly higher disease control rates (complete and partial response, stable disease) compared to cTACE, especially in the B/D setting (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in PFS between the groups [median PFS (months): cTACE, 10.0 vs. DEB, 7.0 vs. DSM, 10.0; p = 0.436].

CONCLUSION

Our study provides valuable perspectives in the decision-making for a specific TACE technique: DEB-TACE and DSM-TACE showed improved tumor response. DEB-TACE showed a prolonged impact on liver function and more side effects, so patients with impaired liver function should be more strictly selected, especially in the palliative subgroup.

Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Palonosetron Hydrochloride in Preventing Nausea And Vomiting After TACE: A Retrospective Analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate the mechanism of nausea and vomiting after TACE, and analyze the efficacy and safety of palonosetron hydrochloride in the prevention of nausea and vomiting after TACE.

METHODS

The data of 221 patients who underwent TACE in the Department of Intervention Therapy from August 2018 to August 2020 were collected. The patients were divided into two groups: those who did not use palonosetron hydrochloride before TACE (TACE group, N=116); and those who used palonosetron hydrochloride before TACE (TACE+palonosetron group, N=105). Primary study endpoint: The control rate of nausea and vomiting in the two groups at 0-24 h (acute), 24-120 h (delayed), and 0-120 h. Secondary Study Endpoints: Adverse events of palonosetron hydrochloride.

RESULTS

TACE group vs TACE+palonosetron group: 0-24 h, 74 vs. 44 patients with nausea (63.8% vs. 41.9%); 24-120 h, 50 vs. 16 patients with nausea (43.1% vs. 15.2%); 0-120 h after TACE, 81 vs. 50 patients with nausea (69.8% vs. 47.6%). 0-24 h, 52 vs. 26 patients with vomiting (44.8% vs. 24.8%); 24-120 h, 24 vs. 8 patients with vomiting (20.7% vs. 7.6%); 0-120 h after TACE, 64 vs. 26 patients with vomiting (55.2% vs. 24.8%). The incidence of nausea and vomiting after TACE was significantly lower in the TACE+palonosetron group than in the TACE group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Palonosetron hydrochloride can significantly reduce the incidence of nausea and vomiting in patients after TACE, with exact effect and high safety.

Hepatic Hilar Block as an Adjunct to Transarterial Embolization of Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Retrospective Review of Safety and Efficacy

PURPOSE

This study investigates whether hepatic hilar nerve blocks (HHNB) provide safe, effective analgesia in patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NET) treated with transarterial embolization (TAE).

METHODS

The retrospective study included all NETs treated with TAE or TAE + HHNB from 1/2020 to 8/2022. Eighty-five patients (45 men), mean age 62 years, were treated in 165 sessions (TAE, n = 153; TAE + HHNB, n = 12). For HHNBs, ≤10 mL bupivacaine HCl 0.25% ± 2 mg methylprednisolone were injected under ultrasound guidance. The aims were to assess safety of HHNB and reduction in pain. Groups were compared with Pearson's chi-squared and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Logistic regression assessed independent risk factors for pain.

RESULTS

No immediate complications from HHNBs were reported. No difference in incidence of major complications between TAE and TAE + HHNB one month post-embolization was observed (7.19% vs. 8.33%, p = 0.895). No differences in mean length of hospital stay after treatment were observed (TAE 2.2 days [95%CI: 1.74-2.56] vs. TAE + HHNB 2.8 days [95%CI: 1.43-4.26]; p = 0.174). Post-procedure pain was reported in 88.2% of TAE and 75.0% of TAE + HHNB patients (p = 0.185). HHNB recipients were more likely to use analgesic patches (25.0% vs. 5.88%; p = 0.014). No other differences in analgesic use were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

HHNBs can safely be performed in patients with NETs. No difference in hospital stays or analgesic drug use was observed. Managing pain after TAE is an important goal; further study is warranted.

Efficacy and safety analysis of dexamethasone + palonosetron in prevention of post-embolization syndrome after D-TACE: A retrospective study

To investigate the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone + palonosetron in the prevention of post-embolization syndrome after drug-eluting beads transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (D-TACE). The data of 278 patients who received D-TACE from January 2018 to December 2021 were collected and divided into 2 groups: D-TACE group (N = 145) and D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group (N = 133). The incidence of post-embolization syndrome and infection after D-TACE was assessed in both groups. Incidence of abdominal pain: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 56.6% versus 40.6%, P = .008; incidence of fever: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 40.0% versus 14.3%, P = .000; incidence of nausea: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 61.4% versus 39.8%, P = .001; incidence of vomiting: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 48.3% versus 21.1%, P = .000; incidence of infection: D-TACE group versus D-TACE + dexamethasone + palonosetron group, 1.4% versus 1.5%, P = .931. The combined use of dexamethasone and palonosetron before D-TACE can effectively reduce the incidence of post-embolization syndrome and reduce the degree of side effects, but it will not increase the risk of infection.

Transarterial Chemoembolization-Induced Ischemic Colitis: A Rare Complication Due to Nontarget Embolization

Nontarget embolization is a rare complication that may occur after a patient undergoes transarterial chemoembolization as a localized treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. This phenomenon can occur because of variations in arterial blood supply to the liver and ultimately can lead to ischemic complications in unintended locations. We describe a case of nontarget embolization during transarterial chemoembolization causing ischemic colitis because of anatomic variation in the origin of the right hepatic artery. This case highlights the importance of recognizing rare side effects associated with this procedure and the need for comprehensive imaging to assess for anatomical variation to avoid poor outcomes.

Creating and Testing a Model to Predict Postoperative Discomfort in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Receiving Transarterial Chemoembolisation

Background: Abdominal pain is a frequent adverse event in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE). However, there remains uncertainty regarding the determinants of post-TACE pain. Objectives: We aimed to create and verify a prediction model for postoperative pain in patients with HCC after TACE treatment. Methods: This prospective study included all patients with HCC undergoing TACE in our hospital. According to the time of treatment, the dataset was divided into two cohorts (development and validation) in a 3: 2 ratio. After TACE, the participants used a visual analog scale to quantify their pain level at rest over a 24-hour period. The age, gender, tumor location, tumor size and number, medication administration route, and presence of portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT) were recorded in all patients. Results: In total, 137 (mean age: 60.3 ± 10.1 years; 78.1% male) and 91 (mean age: 61.1 ± 10.5 years; 73.6% male) patients were included in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. Furthermore, 46.0% and 39.6% of the patients experienced acute moderate to severe pain after TACE in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. The tumor location, the drug delivery method, and the presence of PVTT were independently associated with post-TACE pain, all of which were combined to develop a prediction model based on a logistic equation. The discrimination of this risk score was satisfactory in both the development (area under the curve (AUC): 0.693, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.609 to 0.769, P < 0.001) and validation (AUC: 0.652, 95% CI: 0.544 to 0.748, P = 0.002) cohorts. There was no significant difference between the two cohorts (difference: 0.042, 95% CI: -0.081 to 0.164, P = 0.506). The risk score had good specificity for predicting post-TACE pain in both the development (83.8% (95% CI: 73.4% to 91.3%)) and validation (76.4% (95% CI: 63.0% to 86.8%)) cohorts. Conclusions: The presence of PVTT, the tumor location, and the drug administration method were risk factors for post-TACE discomfort. A prediction model based on these risk factors was useful for identifying patients who were vulnerable to post-TACE pain. However, further studies are required to validate these findings and optimize the model’s performance.

Post-embolization Syndrome Following Yttrium-90 Radiation Segmentectomy

Post-embolization syndrome (PES) is a complication that commonly occurs after treatment with transarterial embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Patients with PES often present with clinical symptoms such as fever, nausea, abdominal pain, and elevated liver enzymes typically 24-72 hours after the procedure. While cases of PES have been documented in patients treated with transarterial chemoembolization, here, we present an unusual case of delayed onset PES in a 70-year-old male with HCC following treatment with a form of transarterial radioembolization.

Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Why, When, How?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy. It is principally associated with liver cirrhosis and chronic liver disease. The major risk factors for the development of HCC include viral infections (HBV, HCV), alcoholic liver disease (ALD,) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The optimal treatment choice is dictated by multiple variables such as tumor burden, liver function, and patient's health status. Surgical resection, transplantation, ablation, transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), and systemic therapy are potentially useful treatment strategies. TACE is considered the first-line treatment for patients with intermediate stage HCC. The purpose of this review was to assess the indications, the optimal treatment schedule, the technical factors associated with TACE, and the overall application of TACE as a personalized treatment for HCC.