Quantitative Evaluation of CT-perfusion Map As Indicator of Tumor Response to Transarterial Chemoembolization and Radiofrequency Ablation in HCC Patients
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Purpose: To assess if radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) may influence the evaluation of perfusion parameters obtained with CT-perfusion (CT-p) in HCC treated patients.
Materials And Methods: Thirty-three consecutive cirrhotic patients with biopsy-proven diagnosis of HCC lesions and candidates to TACE or RFA were included. The CT-p study of hepatic parenchyma and of treated lesions was performed about 1 month after treatment on 16 multidetector CT after injection of 50mL of non ionic contrast agent (350mg I/mL) at a flow rate of 6mL/s acquiring 40 dynamic scans. A dedicated perfusion software which generated a quantitative map of arterial and portal perfusion by means of colour scale was employed.The following perfusion parameters were assessed before and after RFA or TACE treatment: hepatic perfusion (HP), arterial perfusion (AP), blood volume (BV), time to peak (TTP), hepatic perfusion index (HPI).
Results: A complete treatment was obtained in 16 cases and incomplete treatment in the 17 remaining cases. The perfusion data of completely treated lesions were: HP 10.2±6.3; AP 10.4±7; BV 4.05±4.8; TTP 38.9±4.2; HPI 9.9±9.2, whereas in partially treated lesions were: HP 43.2±15.1mL/s/100g; AP 38.7±8.8mL/min; BV 20.7±9.5mL/100mg; TTP 24±3.7s; HPI 61.7±7.5%. In adjacent cirrhotic parenchyma, the parameters of all evaluated patients were: HP 13.2±4; AP 12.3±3.4; BV 11.8±2.8; TTP 43.9±2.9; and HPI 17.1±9.8. A significant difference (P<0.001) was found for all parameters between residual viable tumor tissue (P<0.001) compared to successfully treated lesion due to the presence of residual arterial vascular structure in viable portion of treated HCC.
Conclusion: According to our results, CT-p evaluation is not influenced by TACE or RFA treatments, thus representing a feasible technique that allows a reproducible quantitative evaluation of treatment response in HCC patients.
Malagari K, Kiakidis T, Moschouris H, Deutsch M, Tanteles S, Pantou E Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2023; 46(3):337-349.
PMID: 36653660 DOI: 10.1007/s00270-022-03346-1.
Chai B, Xiang D, Wang W, Ren Y, Wang F, Wang J Cancer Imaging. 2022; 22(1):38.
PMID: 35908071 PMC: 9338623. DOI: 10.1186/s40644-022-00477-z.
Ekert K, Kloth C, Nikolaou K, Grozinger G, Horger M, Thaiss W Tomography. 2022; 8(2):1148-1158.
PMID: 35448728 PMC: 9028792. DOI: 10.3390/tomography8020094.
Han C, Yang Y, Guo L, Guan Q, Ruan S Arch Med Sci. 2022; 18(1):71-78.
PMID: 35154527 PMC: 8826866. DOI: 10.5114/aoms/100480.
Ruff C, Artzner C, Syha R, Grosse U, Hoffmann R, Bitzer M Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2021; 44(9):1403-1413.
PMID: 34021375 PMC: 8382629. DOI: 10.1007/s00270-021-02858-6.