1
|
Tong TML, Fiocco M, van Duijn-de Vreugd JJ, Lutjeboer J, Speetjens FM, Tijl FGJ, Sitsen ME, Zoethout RWM, Martini CH, Vahrmeijer AL, van der Meer RW, van Rijswijk CSP, van Erkel AR, Kapiteijn E, Burgmans MC. Correction to: Quality of Life Analysis of Patients Treated with Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion for Uveal Melanoma Liver Metastases. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2024:10.1007/s00270-024-03733-w. [PMID: 38709262 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-024-03733-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/07/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- T M L Tong
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M Fiocco
- Mathematical Institute, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Medical Statistics Section, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - J J van Duijn-de Vreugd
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - J Lutjeboer
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - F M Speetjens
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - F G J Tijl
- Department of Extra Corporal Circulation, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M E Sitsen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - R W M Zoethout
- Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C H Martini
- Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A L Vahrmeijer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - R W van der Meer
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C S P van Rijswijk
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A R van Erkel
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - E Kapiteijn
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Tong TML, Fiocco M, van Duijn-de Vreugd JJ, Lutjeboer J, Speetjens FM, Tijl FGJ, Sitsen ME, Zoethout RWM, Martini CH, Vahrmeijer AL, van der Meer RW, van Rijswijk CSP, van Erkel AR, Kapiteijn E, Burgmans MC. Quality of Life Analysis of Patients Treated with Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion for Uveal Melanoma Liver Metastases. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2024:10.1007/s00270-024-03713-0. [PMID: 38587534 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-024-03713-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2023] [Accepted: 03/12/2024] [Indexed: 04/09/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Percutaneous hepatic perfusion with melphalan (M-PHP) is a minimally invasive therapy with proven efficacy in patients with uveal melanoma (UM) liver metastases. M-PHP is associated with a short hospital admission time and limited systemic side effects. In this study, we assessed quality of life (QoL) in UM patients treated with M-PHP. MATERIALS AND METHODS A prospective, single-center study including 24 patients treated with M-PHP for UM metastases to the liver. QoL questionnaires were collected at baseline, on day 2/3 after M-PHP, and on day 7 and day 21 after M-PHP, according to study protocol. The results were scored according to EORTC-QLQ C30 global health status (GHS), functional scales, and symptom scales. The difference in scores at baseline and subsequent time points was analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and multiple testing Bonferroni correction. Adverse events (AE) were registered up to 30 days after M-PHP according to CTCAE v5.0. RESULTS Twenty-four patients (14 males; median age 63.0 years) completed 96 questionnaires. Most scores on all scales declined on day 2/3 after M-PHP. On day 21 after M-PHP, 12 out of 15 scores returned to baseline, including median GHS scores. Three variables were significantly worse on day 21 compared to baseline: fatigue (6-33; p = 0.002), physical functioning (100 vs 86.7; p = 0.003), and role functioning (100 vs 66.7; p = 0.001). Grade 3/4 AEs consisted mainly of hematological complications, such as leukopenia and thrombopenia. CONCLUSION M-PHP causes fatigue and a decline in physical and role functioning in the 1st weeks after treatment, but GHS returns to baseline levels within 21 days. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 3: Cohort study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M L Tong
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M Fiocco
- Mathematical Institute, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Medical Statistics Section, Department of Biomedical Data Science, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - J J van Duijn-de Vreugd
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - J Lutjeboer
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - F M Speetjens
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - F G J Tijl
- Department of Extra Corporal Circulation, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M E Sitsen
- Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - R W M Zoethout
- Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C H Martini
- Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A L Vahrmeijer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - R W van der Meer
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C S P van Rijswijk
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A R van Erkel
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - E Kapiteijn
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Interventional Radiology Research (IR2) Group, Department of Radiology, C2-S, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tong TML, van der Kooij MK, Speetjens FM, van Erkel AR, van der Meer RW, Lutjeboer J, van Persijn van Meerten EL, Martini CH, Zoethout RWM, Tijl FGJ, Blank CU, Burgmans MC, Kapiteijn E. Combining Hepatic Percutaneous Perfusion with Ipilimumab plus Nivolumab in advanced uveal melanoma (CHOPIN): study protocol for a phase Ib/randomized phase II trial. Trials 2022; 23:137. [PMID: 35152908 PMCID: PMC8842930 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06036-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2021] [Accepted: 01/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background While immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has revolutionized the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, no standard treatments are available for patients with metastatic uveal melanoma (UM). Several locoregional therapies are effective in the treatment of liver metastases, such as percutaneous hepatic perfusion with melphalan (M-PHP). The available literature suggests that treatment with ICI following locoregional treatment of liver UM metastases can result in clinical response. We hypothesize that combining M-PHP with ICI will lead to enhanced antigen presentation and increased immunomodulatory effect, improving control of both hepatic and extrahepatic disease. Methods Open-label, single-center, phase Ib/randomized phase II trial, evaluating the safety and efficacy of the combination of M-PHP with ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4 antibody) and nivolumab (anti-PD-1 antibody) in patients with unresectable hepatic metastases of UM in first-line treatment, with or without the limited extrahepatic disease. The primary objective is to determine the safety, toxicity, and efficacy of the combination regimen, defined by maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and progression-free survival (PFS) at 1 year. Secondary objectives include overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR). A maximum of 88 patients will be treated in phase I and phase II combined. Baseline characteristics will be described with descriptive statistics (t-test, chi-square test). To study the association between risk factors and toxicity, a logistic regression model will be applied. PFS and OS will be summarized using Kaplan-Meier curves. Discussion This is the first trial to evaluate this treatment combination by establishing the maximum tolerated dose and evaluating the efficacy of the combination treatment. M-PHP has shown to be a safe and effective treatment for UM patients with liver metastases and became the standard treatment option in our center. The combination of ICI with M-PHP is investigated in the currently described trial which might lead to a better treatment response both in and outside the liver. Trial Registration This trial was registered in the US National Library of Medicine with identifier NCT04283890. Registered as per February 2020 - Retrospectively registered. EudraCT registration number: 2018-004248-49. Local MREC registration number: NL60508.058.19.
Collapse
|
4
|
Hendriks P, Sudiono DR, Schaapman JJ, Coenraad MJ, Tushuizen ME, Takkenberg RB, Oosterveer TTM, de Geus-Oei LF, van Delden OM, Burgmans MC. Thermal ablation combined with transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: What is the right treatment sequence? Eur J Radiol 2021; 144:110006. [PMID: 34717187 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.110006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/04/2021] [Revised: 10/18/2021] [Accepted: 10/21/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The combination treatment regimen of thermal ablation (TA) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has gained a place in treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) lesions > 3 cm unsuitable for surgery. Despite a high heterogeneity in the currently used treatment protocols, the pooled results of combined treatments seem to outperform those of TA or TACE alone. TACE preceding TA has been studied extensively, while results of the reverse treatment sequence are lacking. In this retrospective cohort study we compared the two treatment sequences. PATIENTS AND METHODS 38 patients (median age: 68.5 yrs (range 40-84), male: 34, liver cirrhosis: 33, early stage HCC: 21, intermediate stage HCC: 17) were included in two tertiary referral centers, of whom 27 were treated with TA and adjuvant TACE (TA + TACE). The other 11 patients received TA with neoadjuvant TACE (TACE + TA). Overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP) and local tumor progression (LTP) free survival were determined for the entire cohort and compared between the two treatment sequences. RESULTS The median OS of all patients was 52.7 months and the median time to LTP was 11.5 months (censored for liver transplantation). No differences were found with respect to OS between the two treatment sequences. Median time to LTP for TACE + TA was 23.6 months and 8.1 months for TA + TACE (p = 0.19). DISCUSSION No statistical differences were found for OS, TTP and time to LTP between patients treated with TA combined with neoadjuvant or adjuvant TACE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P Hendriks
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
| | - D R Sudiono
- Department of Radiology, NWZ Hospital Group, Alkmaar, the Netherlands
| | - J J Schaapman
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M J Coenraad
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M E Tushuizen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - R B Takkenberg
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T T M Oosterveer
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - L F de Geus-Oei
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Biomedical Photonic Imaging Group, University of Twente, the Netherlands
| | - O M van Delden
- Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Görgec B, Hansen I, Kemmerich G, Syversveen T, Abu Hilal M, Belt EJT, Bisschops RHC, Bollen TL, Bosscha K, Burgmans MC, Cappendijk V, De Boer MT, D'Hondt M, Edwin B, Gielkens H, Grünhagen DJ, Gillardin P, Gobardhan PD, Hartgrink HH, Horsthuis K, Kok NFM, Kint PAM, Kruimer JWH, Leclercq WKG, Lips DJ, Lutin B, Maas M, Marsman HA, Morone M, Pennings JP, Peringa J, Te Riele WW, Vermaas M, Wicherts D, Willemssen FEJA, Zonderhuis BM, Bossuyt PMM, Swijnenburg RJ, Fretland ÅA, Verhoef C, Besselink MG, Stoker J. Clinical added value of MRI to CT in patients scheduled for local therapy of colorectal liver metastases (CAMINO): study protocol for an international multicentre prospective diagnostic accuracy study. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:1116. [PMID: 34663243 PMCID: PMC8524830 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08833-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2021] [Accepted: 10/04/2021] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Abdominal computed tomography (CT) is the standard imaging method for patients with suspected colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in the diagnostic workup for surgery or thermal ablation. Diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic-acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the liver is increasingly used to improve the detection rate and characterization of liver lesions. MRI is superior in detection and characterization of CRLM as compared to CT. However, it is unknown how MRI actually impacts patient management. The primary aim of the CAMINO study is to evaluate whether MRI has sufficient clinical added value to be routinely added to CT in the staging of CRLM. The secondary objective is to identify subgroups who benefit the most from additional MRI. METHODS In this international multicentre prospective incremental diagnostic accuracy study, 298 patients with primary or recurrent CRLM scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation based on CT staging will be enrolled from 17 centres across the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. All study participants will undergo CT and diffusion-weighted and gadoxetic-acid enhanced MRI prior to local therapy. The local multidisciplinary team will provide two local therapy plans: first, based on CT-staging and second, based on both CT and MRI. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of clinically significant CRLM (CS-CRLM) detected by MRI not visible on CT. CS-CRLM are defined as liver lesions leading to a change in local therapeutical management. If MRI detects new CRLM in segments which would have been resected in the original operative plan, these are not considered CS-CRLM. It is hypothesized that MRI will lead to the detection of CS-CRLM in ≥10% of patients which is considered the minimal clinically important difference. Furthermore, a prediction model will be developed using multivariable logistic regression modelling to evaluate the predictive value of patient, tumor and procedural variables on finding CS-CRLM on MRI. DISCUSSION The CAMINO study will clarify the clinical added value of MRI to CT in patients with CRLM scheduled for local therapy. This study will provide the evidence required for the implementation of additional MRI in the routine work-up of patients with primary and recurrent CRLM for local therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION The CAMINO study was registered in the Netherlands National Trial Register under number NL8039 on September 20th 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Hansen
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - G Kemmerich
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - T Syversveen
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - E J T Belt
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
| | - R H C Bisschops
- Department of Radiology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
| | - T L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - V Cappendijk
- Department of Radiology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - M T De Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - B Edwin
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - H Gielkens
- Department of Radiology, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - D J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P Gillardin
- Department of Radiology, Hospital Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
| | - P D Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - H H Hartgrink
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - K Horsthuis
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - N F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P A M Kint
- Department of Radiology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - J W H Kruimer
- Department of Radiology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
| | - W K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
| | - D J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - B Lutin
- Department of Radiology, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - M Maas
- Department of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - H A Marsman
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Morone
- Department of Radiology, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - J P Pennings
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J Peringa
- Department of Radiology, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - W W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - M Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, The Netherlands
| | - D Wicherts
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Oost-Limburg, Genk, Belgium
| | - F E J A Willemssen
- Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B M Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P M M Bossuyt
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R J Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Å A Fretland
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - C Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Stoker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Burgmans MC, Hendriks P, Rietbergen DDD. Does a Widely Adopted Approach Need Reconsideration: Embolization of Parasitized Extrahepatic Tumor Feeders in Patients Undergoing Transarterial Liver-Directed Therapy? Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2020; 43:1103-1104. [DOI: 10.1007/s00270-020-02478-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2020] [Accepted: 04/02/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
|
7
|
Elfrink AKE, Pool M, van der Werf LR, Marra E, Burgmans MC, Meijerink MR, den Dulk M, van den Boezem PB, Te Riele WW, Patijn GA, Wouters MWJM, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, Gobardhan PD, Buis CI, Kuhlmann KFD, Verhoef C, Besselink MG, Grünhagen DJ, Klaase JM, Kok NFM. Preoperative imaging for colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide population-based study. BJS Open 2020; 4:605-621. [PMID: 32374497 PMCID: PMC7397351 DOI: 10.1002/bjs5.50291] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2020] [Accepted: 03/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) preoperative imaging may include contrast‐enhanced (ce) MRI and [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (18F‐FDG) PET–CT. This study assessed trends and variation between hospitals and oncological networks in the use of preoperative imaging in the Netherlands. Methods Data for all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018 were retrieved from a nationwide auditing database. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess use of ceMRI, 18F‐FDG PET–CT and combined ceMRI and 18F‐FDG PET–CT, and trends in preoperative imaging and hospital and oncological network variation. Results A total of 4510 patients were included, of whom 1562 had ceMRI, 872 had 18F‐FDG PET–CT, and 1293 had combined ceMRI and 18F‐FDG PET–CT. Use of ceMRI increased over time (from 9·6 to 26·2 per cent; P < 0·001), use of 18F‐FDG PET–CT decreased (from 28·6 to 6·0 per cent; P < 0·001), and use of both ceMRI and 18F‐FDG PET–CT 16·9 per cent) remained stable. Unadjusted variation in the use of ceMRI, 18F‐FDG PET–CT, and combined ceMRI and 18F‐FDG PET–CT ranged from 5·6 to 100 per cent between hospitals. After case‐mix correction, hospital and oncological network variation was found for all imaging modalities. Discussion Significant variation exists concerning the use of preoperative imaging for CRLM between hospitals and oncological networks in the Netherlands. The use of MRI is increasing, whereas that of 18F‐FDG PET–CT is decreasing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A K E Elfrink
- Scientific Bureau, Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - M Pool
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L R van der Werf
- Scientific Bureau, Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E Marra
- Scientific Bureau, Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M R Meijerink
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M den Dulk
- Departments of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - W W Te Riele
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.,St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - M W J M Wouters
- Scientific Bureau, Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - M S L Liem
- Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - C I Buis
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - K F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - C Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - D J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - N F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sibinga Mulder BG, Hendriks P, Baetens TR, van Erkel AR, van Rijswijk CSP, van der Meer RW, van de Velde CJH, Vahrmeijer AL, Mieog JSD, Burgmans MC. Quantitative margin assessment of radiofrequency ablation of a solitary colorectal hepatic metastasis using MIRADA RTx on CT scans: a feasibility study. BMC Med Imaging 2019; 19:71. [PMID: 31429708 PMCID: PMC6700773 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-019-0360-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2019] [Accepted: 07/23/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Compared to surgery, radiofrequency ablation(RFA) for colorectal liver metastasis(CRLM) is associated with higher local recurrence(LR) rates. A wide margin (at least 5 mm) is generally recommended to prevent LR, but the optimal method to assess ablation margins is yet to be established. The aim of our study was to evaluate the feasibility and reproducibility of CT-CT co-registration, using MIRADA software, in order to assess ablation margins of patients with CRLM. Methods In this retrospective study, pre- and post-ablation contrast-enhanced CT scans of 29 patients, treated with percutaneous RFA for a solitary CRLM, were co-registered. Co-registration was performed by two independent radiologist, based on venous structures in proximity to the tumor. Feasibility of CT-CT co-registration and inter-observer agreement for reproducibility and ablation margins was determined. Furthermore, the minimal ablation margin was compared with the occurrence of LR during follow-up. Results Co-registration was considered feasible in 18 patients (61% male, 63.1(±10.9) year), with a perfect inter-observer agreement for completeness of ablation: κ = 1.0(p < 0.001). And substantial inter-observer agreement for measurement of the minimal margin (≤ 0 mm, 1-5 mm, ≥ 5 mm): κ = 0.723(p-value < 0.001). LR occurred in eight of nine(88.9%) incompletely ablated CRLM and in one of the nine completely ablated CRLM(11.1%). Conclusion Co-registration using MIRADA is reproducible and potentially a valuable tool in defining technical success. Feasibility of co-registration of pre- and post-ablation CT scans is suboptimal if scans are not acquired concordantly. Co-registration may potentially aid in the prediction of LR after percutaneous ablation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12880-019-0360-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B G Sibinga Mulder
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - P Hendriks
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - T R Baetens
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A R van Erkel
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C S P van Rijswijk
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - R W van der Meer
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C J H van de Velde
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - A L Vahrmeijer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Sibinga Mulder BG, Visser K, Feshtali S, Vahrmeijer AL, Swijnenburg RJ, Hartgrink HH, van den Boom R, Burgmans MC, Mieog JSD. Gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging significantly influences the clinical course in patients with colorectal liver metastases. BMC Med Imaging 2018; 18:44. [PMID: 30442100 PMCID: PMC6238306 DOI: 10.1186/s12880-018-0289-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2018] [Accepted: 11/05/2018] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Gadoxetic acid (Primovist™)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (P-MRI) scans have higher accuracy and increased detection of small colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) compared to CT scans or conventional MRI scans. But, P-MRI scans are still inconsistently acquired in the diagnostic work up of patients with CRLM. The aim of this study was to determine the influence of P-MRI scans on treatment plan proposition and subsequently the clinical course of the patient. Methods Eighty-three consecutive patients with potentially resectable CRLM based on a conventional CT scan underwent P-MRI scanning prior to treatment. Treatment plans proposed by the multidisciplinary team were compared before and after P-MRI scanning and related to the final treatment and diagnosis, the accuracy for the CT scan and P-MRI scan was calculated. Results P-MRI scans led to a change of treatment in 15 patients (18%) and alteration of extensiveness of local therapy in another 17 patients (20%). All changes were justified leading to an accuracy of 93% for treatment proposition based on P-MRI scan, compared to an accuracy of 75% for the CT scan. Conclusions P-MRI scans provide additional information that can aid in proposing the most suitable treatment for patients with CRLM and might prevent short-term reintervention. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12880-018-0289-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B G Sibinga Mulder
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - K Visser
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - S Feshtali
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - A L Vahrmeijer
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - R J Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - H H Hartgrink
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - R van den Boom
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - M C Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Coebergh van den Braak RRJ, van Rijssen LB, van Kleef JJ, Vink GR, Berbee M, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Bloemendal HJ, Bruno MJ, Burgmans MC, Busch ORC, Coene PPLO, Coupé VMH, Dekker JWT, van Eijck CHJ, Elferink MAG, Erdkamp FLG, van Grevenstein WMU, de Groot JWB, van Grieken NCT, de Hingh IHJT, Hulshof MCCM, Ijzermans JNM, Kwakkenbos L, Lemmens VEPP, Los M, Meijer GA, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, de Noo ME, van de Poll-Franse LV, Punt CJA, Rietbroek RC, Roeloffzen WWH, Rozema T, Ruurda JP, van Sandick JW, Schiphorst AHW, Schipper H, Siersema PD, Slingerland M, Sommeijer DW, Spaander MCW, Sprangers MAG, Stockmann HBAC, Strijker M, van Tienhoven G, Timmermans LM, Tjin-a-Ton MLR, van der Velden AMT, Verhaar MJ, Verkooijen HM, Vles WJ, de Vos-Geelen JMPGM, Wilmink JW, Zimmerman DDE, van Oijen MGH, Koopman M, Besselink MGH, van Laarhoven HWM. Nationwide comprehensive gastro-intestinal cancer cohorts: the 3P initiative. Acta Oncol 2018; 57:195-202. [PMID: 28723307 DOI: 10.1080/0284186x.2017.1346381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The increasing sub-classification of cancer patients due to more detailed molecular classification of tumors, and limitations of current trial designs, require innovative research designs. We present the design, governance and current standing of three comprehensive nationwide cohorts including pancreatic, esophageal/gastric, and colorectal cancer patients (NCT02070146). Multidisciplinary collection of clinical data, tumor tissue, blood samples, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures with a nationwide coverage, provides the infrastructure for future and novel trial designs and facilitates research to improve outcomes of gastrointestinal cancer patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS All patients aged ≥18 years with pancreatic, esophageal/gastric or colorectal cancer are eligible. Patients provide informed consent for: (1) reuse of clinical data; (2) biobanking of primary tumor tissue; (3) collection of blood samples; (4) to be informed about relevant newly identified genomic aberrations; (5) collection of longitudinal PROs; and (6) to receive information on new interventional studies and possible participation in cohort multiple randomized controlled trials (cmRCT) in the future. RESULTS In 2015, clinical data of 21,758 newly diagnosed patients were collected in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional clinical data on the surgical procedures were registered in surgical audits for 13,845 patients. Within the first two years, tumor tissue and blood samples were obtained from 1507 patients; during this period, 1180 patients were included in the PRO registry. Response rate for PROs was 90%. The consent rate to receive information on new interventional studies and possible participation in cmRCTs in the future was >85%. The number of hospitals participating in the cohorts is steadily increasing. CONCLUSION A comprehensive nationwide multidisciplinary gastrointestinal cancer cohort is feasible and surpasses the limitations of classical study designs. With this initiative, novel and innovative studies can be performed in an efficient, safe, and comprehensive setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - L. B. van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. J. van Kleef
- Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. R. Vink
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M. Berbee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Maastro Clinic, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - H. J. Bloemendal
- Department of Medical Oncology, Meander Medisch Centrum, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - M. J. Bruno
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. C. Burgmans
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - O. R. C. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P. P. L. O. Coene
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - V. M. H. Coupé
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. W. T. Dekker
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - C. H. J. van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. A. G. Elferink
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - F. L. G. Erdkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, Zuyderland Medisch Centrum, Heerlen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - N. C. T. van Grieken
- Department of Pathology, VU University Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - M. C. C. M. Hulshof
- Department of Radiotherapy, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. N. M. Ijzermans
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - M. Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - G. A. Meijer
- Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I. Q. Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - M. E. de Noo
- Department of Surgery, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | | | - C. J. A. Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R. C. Rietbroek
- Department of Medical Oncology, Rode Kruis Hospital, Beverwijk, The Netherlands
| | - W. W. H. Roeloffzen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Treant Zorggroep, Hoogeveen, The Netherlands
| | - T. Rozema
- Department of Radiotherapy, Instituut Verbeeten, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - J. P. Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J. W. van Sandick
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute – Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - H. Schipper
- Stichting voor Patiënten met Kanker aan het Spijsverteringskanaal (SPKS), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P. D. Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - M. Slingerland
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - D. W. Sommeijer
- Department of Medical Oncology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands
| | - M. C. W. Spaander
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. A. G. Sprangers
- Department of Medical Psychology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - M. Strijker
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. van Tienhoven
- Department of Radiotherapy, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - L. M. Timmermans
- Stichting voor Patiënten met Kanker aan het Spijsverteringskanaal (SPKS), Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M. L. R. Tjin-a-Ton
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Rivierenland, Tiel, The Netherlands
| | | | - M. J. Verhaar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Zuwe Hofpoort Hospital, Woerden, The Netherlands
| | - H. M. Verkooijen
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - W. J. Vles
- Department of Surgery, Ikazia Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - J. W. Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D. D. E. Zimmerman
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - M. G. H. van Oijen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M. Koopman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M. G. H. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Burgmans MC, van Erkel AR, Too CW, Coenraad M, Lo RHG, Tan BS. Pilot study evaluating catheter-directed contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared to catheter-directed computed tomography arteriography as adjuncts to digital subtraction angiography to guide transarterial chemoembolization. Clin Radiol 2014; 69:1056-61. [PMID: 25017449 DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2014.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2014] [Revised: 05/22/2014] [Accepted: 06/02/2014] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
AIM To investigate the feasibility and procedural value of catheter-directed contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CCEUS) compared with catheter-directed computed tomography arteriography (CCTA) in patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) guided by digital subtraction angiography (DSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS From December 2010 to December 2011, a pilot study was conducted including nine patients (mean age 66.6 years; SD 8.3 years; seven men) undergoing TACE with drug-eluting beads for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Both CCEUS and CCTA were performed in addition to DSA. Alterations of treatment plan based on CCEUS were recorded and compared with CCTA. RESULTS CCEUS provided additional information to DSA altering the treatment plan in four out of nine patients (44.4%). In these four patients, CCEUS helped to identify additional tumour feeders (n = 2) or led to a change in catheter position (n = 2). The information provided by CCEUS was similar to that provided by CCTA. CONCLUSION CCEUS is a potentially valuable imaging tool in adjunction to DSA when performing TACE and may provide similar information to CCTA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M C Burgmans
- Interventional Radiology Center, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore; Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | - A R van Erkel
- Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C W Too
- Interventional Radiology Center, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - M Coenraad
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - R H G Lo
- Interventional Radiology Center, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - B S Tan
- Interventional Radiology Center, Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Plaisier AS, Burgmans MC, Vonken EPA, Prakken NH, Cox MGPJ, Hauer RN, Velthuis BK, Cramer MJM. Image quality assessment of the right ventricle with three different delayed enhancement sequences in patients suspected of ARVC/D. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011; 28:595-601. [PMID: 21503703 PMCID: PMC3326369 DOI: 10.1007/s10554-011-9871-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2010] [Accepted: 04/05/2011] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Histopathologic findings in arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy/dysplasia (ARVC/D) are replacement of the normal myocardium with fatty and fibrous elements with preferential involvement of the right ventricle. The right ventricular fibrosis can be visualised by post-gadolinium delayed enhancement inversion recovery imaging (DE imaging). We compared the image quality of three different gradient echo MRI sequences for short axis DE imaging of the right ventricle (RV). We retrospectively analysed MRI scans performed between February 2005 and December 2008 in 97 patients (mean age: 41.2 years, 67% men) suspected of ARVC/D. For DE imaging either a 2D Phase Sensitive (PSIR), a 2D (2D) or a 3D (3D) inversion recovery sequence was used in respectively 38, 32 and 27 MRI-examinations. The RV, divided in 10 segments, was assessed for image quality by two radiologists in random sequence. A consensus reading was performed if results differed between the two readings. Image quality was good in 24% of all segments in the 3D group, 66% in the 2D group and 79% in the PSIR group. Poor image quality was observed in 51% (3D), 10% (2D), and 2% (PSIR) of all segments. Exams were considered suitable for clinical use in 7% of exams in the 3D group, 75% of exams in the 2D group and 90% of exams of the PSIR group. Breathing-artifacts occurred in 22% (3D), 59% (2D) and 53% (PSIR). Motion-artifacts occurred in 56% (3D), 28% (2D) and 29% (PSIR). Post-gadolinium imaging using the PSIR sequence results in better and more consistent image quality of the RV compared to the 2D and 3D sequences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A S Plaisier
- Department of Radiology, UMCU, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|