Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26345332›Full record

ArticleLa Radiologia medica2016

Irreversible electroporation of hepatocellular carcinoma: preliminary report on the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance, computer tomography, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in evaluation of the ablated area.

Vincenza Granata, Elisabetta de Lutio di Castelguidone, Roberta Fusco, Orlando Catalano, Mauro Piccirillo, Raffaele Palaia, Francesco Izzo, Adolfo D'Errico Gallipoli, Antonella Petrillo

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in La Radiologia medica, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Radiological assessment of secondary biliary tree lesions: an update.The Journal of international medical research · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Immunotherapy Assessment: A New Paradigm for Radiologists.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vincenza GranataDepartment of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G.Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Elisabetta de Lutio di CastelguidoneDepartment of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G.Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Roberta FuscoDepartment of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G.Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Orlando CatalanoDepartment of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G.Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy. orlandcat@tin.it.
Mauro PiccirilloDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Fondazione Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Raffaele PalaiaDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Fondazione Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Francesco IzzoDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Fondazione Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Adolfo D'Errico GallipoliDepartment of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G.Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Antonella PetrilloDepartment of Radiology, Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G.Pascale, via Mariano Semmola, Naples, 80131, Italy.
Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIrreversible electroporation (IRE) is a new ablation modality. Our purpose was to describe the effectiveness and the safety of the treatment and to evaluate the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) diagnostic accuracy in HCC patients treated with IRE at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn an 18-month period, we treated 24 HCC lesions in 20 patients unfit for surgery. MRI, CT and CEUS were performed before and one, 3 and 6 month after IRE. We employed the liver-specific contrast medium Primovist (gadolinium ethoxybenzyl dimeglumine) in MRI. After IRE the lesions were classified as responders or non-responders to the treatment according to the mRECIST and the complications were recorded. We evaluated the size, shape, signal intensity (T1-W, T2-W, and DWI) in MRI, dynamic contrast enhancement pattern for CEUS, CT and MRI and signal behavior during the liver-specific phase for MRI.

resultsAccording to mRECIST, at 1 month MRI and CEUS showed a complete response (CR) in 91.7% of cases (22/24) tumors, while there was partial response (PR) in the remaining 2/24 (8.3%) treated nodules; in CT study all ablated zone appeared as necrotic (CR 100%). The residual viable tumor in MRI and in CEUS study had similar diameter (10 mm). No new HCC were identified from MRI, CT or CEUS. At 3 months MRI and CEUS showed the same results seen after 1 month from the treatment. Twenty-two necrotic lesions, and 2 residual tumors were found (CR = 91.7% and PD = 8.3%). In MRI study the two cases of residual tumor tissue had a diameter of 11 and 12 mm each. At CEUS the diameter of residual HCC was similar to the diameter at 1 month. CT showed 23 necrotic areas and one residual viable tissue in the treated zone, with a diameter of 10 mm (CR = 95.3% and PD = 4.7%). No new foci of HCC were identified from all imaging studies. At 6 months MRI, CEUS, and CT showed 22 necrotic lesions and 2 residual tumors in ablated zone (CR = 91.7% and PD = 8.3%). At MRI the diameters of the two residual viable HCCs were 12 and 14 mm, at CEUS the diameters were 11 and 12 mm, while at CT the diameters were 10 and 10 mm. No statistical difference was evaluated between CR, PR, PD percentage values for MRI, CT and CEUS (p value > 0.05 at Chi-square test). No major vascular complication was recorded after IRE. Six out of 20 patients (30%) showed a transient hepatic intensity difference (THID) area within the normal liver parenchyma adjacent to the treated lesions. Two of the 20 patients (10%) showed an absent concentration of liver-specific contrast medium around the ablation zone. Two patients developed complications, consisting in a peripheral arteriovenous shunt and a segmental dilation of the intrahepatic biliary ducts. We found no statistically significant difference in morphology, size (variation in the largest diameter), signal intensity in T1-weighted images, in T2-weighted images, in DWI and in the related map of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), presence or absence of contrast enhanced during the arterial, portal, and late phase in MRI, CT, and CEUS, and signal characteristic during the liver-specific phase in MRI of the ablation zone at 1, 3, and 6 months.

conclusionIRE is a feasible, safe and efficient modality in the treatment of patients with non-resectable HCC. We had no major complication, even when the ablated lesion was adjacent to major branches of the portal vein. All images techniques showed similar accuracy during the follow-up at 1, 3, and 6 months in the assessment ablated zone.

Indexed as

ElectrochemotherapyMagnetic Resonance ImagingTomography, X-Ray ComputedAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, HepatocellularContrast MediaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGadolinium DTPAHumansLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMultimodal ImagingUltrasonographyContrast MediaGadolinium DTPAgadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPAComputed tomographyContrast-enhanced ultrasoundHepatocellular carcinomaLiver ablationMagnetic resonance imagingResponse to treatment

Identifiers

PMID26345332
OpenAlexW1509865425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.