Display options
Share it on

Eur J Radiol Open. 2021 Jul 08;8:100367. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2021.100367. eCollection 2021.

Assessing the value of volume navigation during ultrasound-guided radiofrequency- and microwave-ablations of liver lesions.

European journal of radiology open

Philippa Meershoek, Nynke S van den Berg, Jacob Lutjeboer, Mark C Burgmans, Rutger W van der Meer, Catharina S P van Rijswijk, Matthias N van Oosterom, Arian R van Erkel, Fijs W B van Leeuwen

Affiliations

  1. Interventional Radiology Section, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC, Leiden, the Netherlands.
  2. Interventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2300 RC, Leiden, the Netherlands.

PMID: 34286051 PMCID: PMC8273361 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejro.2021.100367

Abstract

PURPOSE: The goal of our study was to determine the influence of ultrasound (US)-coupled volume navigation on the use of computed tomography (CT) during minimally-invasive radiofrequency and microwave ablation procedures of liver lesions.

METHOD: Twenty-five patients with 40 liver lesions of different histological origin were retrospectively analysed. Lesions were ablated following standard protocol, using 1) conventional US-guidance, 2) manual registered volume navigation (

RESULTS: Of the 40 lesions, sixteen (40.0 %) could be targeted with conventional US-guidance only, sixteen (40.0 %) with

CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort,

© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Image guided interventions; Interventional radiology; Microwave ablation; Navigation; Radiofrequency ablation; Ultrasound

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Radiology. 2005 Aug;236(2):666-70 - PubMed
  2. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008 Oct;23(10):1492-500 - PubMed
  3. Eur J Radiol. 2014 Jan;83(1):111-6 - PubMed
  4. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 May;194(5):W396-400 - PubMed
  5. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012 May;23(5):627-34 - PubMed
  6. Ultraschall Med. 2010 Jun;31(3):296-301 - PubMed
  7. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014 Nov;25(11):1691-705.e4 - PubMed
  8. Dig Dis. 2012;30(6):580-7 - PubMed
  9. J Biomed Opt. 2016 Aug 1;21(8):86008 - PubMed
  10. J Ultrasound Med. 2011 May;30(5):607-15 - PubMed
  11. Pediatr Radiol. 2016 Jul;46(8):1173-8 - PubMed
  12. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013 Nov;201(5):1141-7 - PubMed
  13. Med Image Anal. 2008 Oct;12(5):577-85 - PubMed
  14. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010 Aug;21(8 Suppl):S257-63 - PubMed
  15. Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jan 7;57(1):69-91 - PubMed
  16. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 May;190(5):1324-30 - PubMed
  17. Eur J Radiol. 2012 Sep;81(9):2281-9 - PubMed
  18. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021 May 25;: - PubMed
  19. Comput Aided Surg. 2015;20(1):61-72 - PubMed
  20. Eur J Radiol. 2011 Aug;79(2):e80-4 - PubMed
  21. Liver Cancer. 2015 Sep;4(3):176-87 - PubMed
  22. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2016 Dec;39(12):1708-1715 - PubMed
  23. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2015 Feb;38(1):143-51 - PubMed
  24. J Ultrasound Med. 2014 Nov;33(11):2005-10 - PubMed
  25. J Nucl Med. 2016 Oct;57(10):1650-1653 - PubMed
  26. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Jun;198(6):1438-44 - PubMed
  27. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007 Sep;18(9):1141-50 - PubMed
  28. Dig Dis. 2013;31(5-6):485-9 - PubMed
  29. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017 Jun;40(6):914-923 - PubMed
  30. Cancer. 2005 Mar 15;103(6):1201-9 - PubMed
  31. Abdom Imaging. 2011 Dec;36(6):648-60 - PubMed
  32. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Jun;190(6):W335-41 - PubMed

Publication Types