ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2018
A Novel CT to Cone-Beam CT Registration Method Enables Immediate Real-Time Intraprocedural Three-Dimensional Assessment of Ablative Treatments of Liver Malignancies.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of fusion imaging for immediate post-ablation assessment of malignant liver neoplasms: A systematic review.Cancer medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Renal Arteriography and C-arm CT-Guided Ablation (RenACAGA) for Thermal Ablation of Challenging Renal Tumors.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Article
- Precision Imaging Guidance in the Era of Precision Oncology: An Update of Imaging Tools for Interventional Procedures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Quantitative Automated Segmentation of Lipiodol Deposits on Cone-Beam CT Imaging Acquired during Transarterial Chemoembolization for Liver Tumors: A Deep Learning Approach.Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2022Article
- Anatomy-guided multimodal registration by learning segmentation without ground truth: Application to intraprocedural CBCT/MR liver segmentation and registration.Medical image analysis · 2021Article
- Short-term outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma using cone-beam computed tomography for planning and image guidance.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Feasibility and Efficacy of Fusion Imaging Systems for Immediate Post Ablation Assessment of Liver Neoplasms: Protocol for a Rapid Systematic Review.International journal of surgery protocols · 2021Article
- Percutaneous Therapies for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Evolution of Liver Directed Therapies.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2021Review
- Cone Beam Computed Tomography Image Fusion with Cross Sectional Images for Percutaneous Renal Tumor Ablation: Preliminary Data.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
- Virtual Treatment Zone From Cone Beam CT Commonly Alters Treatment Plan and Identifies Tumor at Risk for Under-Treatment in US or US Fusion-Guided Microwave Ablation of Liver Tumors.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate a novel contrast-enhanced cone-beam computed tomography (CE-CBCT) registration method for accurate immediate assessment of ablation outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsContrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) was registered with CE-CBCT by applying semiautomatic landmark registration followed by automatic affine and non-rigid registration to correct for respiratory phase differences and liver deformation. This scheme was retrospectively applied to 30 patients who underwent 38 percutaneous microwave liver ablations. Three datasets were obtained for each case: (1) conventional CECT scans 24 h before ablation, (2) intraprocedural CE-CBCT scans, and (3) CECT scans 24 h post-ablation. Using a five-point scale, two experienced radiologists qualitatively assessed registration quality, equivalence of CE-CBCT assessment of ablation outcome to 24 h post-ablation CECT, and perceived increase of confidence using the fusion method to CBCT alone. Additionally, residual post-ablation tumor volumes were measured at both CE-CBCT and 24 h CECT and compared to the pre-CECT.
resultsRegistration quality was high for both radiologists (R1: 4.3 ± 0.6, R2: 4.4 ± 0.5; p = 0.87). Comparisons between the registration of pre-ablation CECT with CE-CBCT versus post-ablation CECT regarding the position of the ablated area to the treated target (R1: 4.4 ± 0.6, R2: 4.6 ± 0.4) and treatment outcome (R1: 4.5 ± 0.5, R2: 4.6 ± 0.4) were equivalent (p > 0.35). Increased confidence was noted when using fusion (R1: 4.6 ± 0.4, R2: 4.6 ± 0.4; p = 0.84). Moreover, in 6 ablations (15.8%) the intraprocedural registered CBCT showed residual tumor precisely where identified on the 24 h post-ablation CECT.
conclusionsCombined CE-CBCT holds the potential to change the current workflow of mini-invasive cancer local treatments. Given earlier visual identification of residual tumor post-ablation, this includes potentially eliminating the need for some additional treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.