Advertisement

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 38, Issue 5, pp 1218–1230 | Cite as

Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) Hepatic Arteriography in Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Performance Depicting Tumors and Tumor Feeders

  • In Joon Lee
  • Jin Wook ChungEmail author
  • Yong Hu Yin
  • Hyo-Cheol Kim
  • Young Il Kim
  • Hwan Jun Jae
  • Jae Hyung Park
Clinical Investigation

Abstract

Purpose

This study was designed to analyze retrospectively the performance of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) hepatic arteriography in depicting tumors and their feeders and to investigate the related determining factors in chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Eighty-six patients with 142 tumors satisfying the imaging diagnosis criteria of HCC were included in this study. The performance of CBCT hepatic arteriography for chemoembolization per tumor and per patient was evaluated using maximum intensity projection images alone (MIP analysis) or MIP combined with multiplanar reformation images (MIP + MPR analysis) regarding the following three aspects: tumor depiction, confidence of tumor feeder detection, and trackability of tumor feeders. Tumor size, tumor enhancement, tumor location, number of feeders, diaphragmatic motion, portal vein enhancement, and hepatic artery to parenchyma enhancement ratio were regarded as potential determining factors.

Results

Tumors were depicted in 125 (88.0 %) and 142 tumors (100 %) on MIP and MIP + MPR analysis, respectively. Imaging performances on MIP and MIP + MPR analysis were good enough to perform subsegmental chemoembolization without additional angiographic investigation in 88 (62.0 %) and 128 tumors (90.1 %) on per-tumor basis and in 43 (50 %) and 73 (84.9 %) on per-patient basis, respectively. Significant determining factors for performance in MIP + MPR analysis on per tumor basis were tumor size (p = 0.030), tumor enhancement (0.005), tumor location (p = 0.001), and diaphragmatic motion (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

CBCT hepatic arteriography provided sufficient information for subsegmental chemoembolization by depicting tumors and their feeders in the vast majority of patients. Combined analysis of MIP and MPR images was essential to enhance the performance of CBCT hepatic arteriography.

Keywords

C-arm CT Cone-beam CT Hepatic arteriography Chemoembolization 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This research was supported by the Core Medical Device R & D Program (10043111, 10043118) funded by the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE), Korea.

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Statement of Human Rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Statement of Informed Consent

This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board, and the requirement for informed consent was waived.

References

  1. 1.
    Bruix J, Sherman M (2005) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 42(5):1208–1236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Forner A, Llovet JM, Bruix J (2012) Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet 379(9822):1245–1255CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kalender WA, Kyriakou Y (2007) Flat-detector computed tomography (FD-CT). Eur Radiol 17(11):2767–2779CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Orth RC, Wallace MJ, Kuo MD (2008) C-arm cone-beam CT: general principles and technical considerations for use in interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19(6):814–820CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kakeda S, Korogi Y, Ohnari N et al (2007) Usefulness of cone-beam volume CT with flat panel detectors in conjunction with catheter angiography for transcatheter arterial embolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18(12):1508–1516CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wallace MJ, Murthy R, Kamat PP et al (2007) Impact of C-arm CT on hepatic arterial interventions for hepatic malignancies. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18(12):1500–1507CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tognolini A, Louie JD, Hwang GL et al (2010) Utility of C-arm CT in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transhepatic arterial chemoembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21(3):339–347CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Iwazawa J, Ohue S, Hashimoto N et al (2012) Survival after C-arm CT-assisted chemoembolization of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Radiol 81(12):3985–3992CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miyayama S, Matsui O, Yamashiro M et al (2007) Ultraselective transcatheter arterial chemoembolization with a 2-f tip microcatheter for small hepatocellular carcinomas: relationship between local tumor recurrence and visualization of the portal vein with iodized oil. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18(3):365–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miyayama S, Yamashiro M, Okuda M et al (2009) Usefulness of cone-beam computed tomography during ultraselective transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for small hepatocellular carcinomas that cannot be demonstrated on angiography. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 32(2):255–264CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee IJ, Chung JW, Yin YH et al (2014) Cone-beam CT hepatic arteriography in chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: angiographic image quality and its determining factors. J Vasc Interv Radiol 25(9):1369–1379 quiz 1379–e1361CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Di Martino M, Marin D, Guerrisi A et al (2010) Intraindividual comparison of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MR imaging and 64-section multidetector CT in the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis. Radiology 256(3):806–816CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iwazawa J, Ohue S, Mitani T et al (2009) Identifying feeding arteries during TACE of hepatic tumors: comparison of C-arm CT and digital subtraction angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 192(4):1057–1063CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Meyer BC, Witschel M, Frericks BB et al (2009) The value of combined soft-tissue and vessel visualisation before transarterial chemoembolisation of the liver using C-arm computed tomography. Eur Radiol 19(9):2302–2309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Virmani S, Ryu RK, Sato KT et al (2007) Effect of C-arm angiographic CT on transcatheter arterial chemoembolization of liver tumors. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18(10):1305–1309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iwazawa J, Ohue S, Hashimoto N et al (2013) Clinical utility and limitations of tumor-feeder detection software for liver cancer embolization. Eur J Radiol 82(10):1665–1671CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Miyayama S, Yamashiro M, Hashimoto M et al (2013) Identification of small hepatocellular carcinoma and tumor-feeding branches with cone-beam CT guidance technology during transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 24(4):501–508CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Loffroy R, Lin M, Rao P et al (2012) Comparing the detectability of hepatocellular carcinoma by C-arm dual-phase cone-beam computed tomography during hepatic arteriography with conventional contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 35(1):97–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • In Joon Lee
    • 1
  • Jin Wook Chung
    • 2
    Email author
  • Yong Hu Yin
    • 2
  • Hyo-Cheol Kim
    • 2
  • Young Il Kim
    • 2
  • Hwan Jun Jae
    • 2
  • Jae Hyung Park
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyNational Cancer CenterGoyang-siRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of RadiologySeoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University HospitalSeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations