Evaluating the Feasibility of Isolated Pancreatic Perfusion for Chemotherapy Using Computed Tomography: An Experimental Study in Pig Models
- 67 Downloads
Percutaneous isolated pancreatic perfusion (PIPP) is performed along with interventional radiology techniques to obtain high drug concentration by occluding the arterial inlet and venous outlet of the pancreas. The experimental study aimed to evaluate the contrast distribution in PIPP under different flow rates with or without anterior mesenteric artery (AMA) occlusion.
Materials and Methods
This study was approved by a local animal experiment ethics committee. Nine pigs were divided into Groups 1, 2, and 3, by infusion rates of 12, 24, and 36 mL/min. Groups 4 and 5 (3 pigs each) and Group 6 (2 pigs) underwent PIPP at the same respective infusion rates with and without AMA occlusion. Computed tomography (CT) arteriography was performed during PIPP with nonionic contrast media. The enhanced volume was calculated by adding the enhanced area in each slice using 1.25-mm axial images. The percent enhanced volume to the whole pancreas (%eV) was used to simulate drug distribution; the result was compared among groups.
Without AMA occlusion, a larger %eV was obtained with high infusion rates (P = 0.039). The median %eV in Groups 1, 2, and 3 were 57.7, 74.2, and 90.5%, respectively. With AMA occlusion, CT demonstrated duodenal enhancement at an infusion rate of 36 mL/min, and the median %eV in Groups 4, 5, and 6 were 92.8, 95.4, and 98.5%, respectively. A significantly larger %eV was obtained after AMA occlusion (P = 0.031).
A higher infusion rate or AMA occlusion increases the enhanced volume in PIPP in pig models.
Level of evidence
No level of evidence.
KeywordsIsolation Pancreas Perfusion Intervention Computed tomography
Financial supports for this study were provided by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B, 23390306) and Early-Career Scientists (B, 15K19821) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
We declare no conflicts of interest.
- 4.Bria E, Milella M, Gelibter A, Cuppone F, Pino MS, Ruggeri EM, Carlini P, Nisticò C, Terzoli E, Cognetti F, Giannarelli D. Gemcitabine-based combinations for inoperable pancreatic cancer: have we made real progression? A meta-analysis of 20 phase 3 trials. Cancer. 2007;110:525–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Colucci G, Labianca R, Di Costanzo F, Gebbia V, Cartenì G, Massidda B, Dapretto E, Manzione L, Piazza E, Sannicolò M, Ciaparrone M, Cavanna L, Giuliani F, Maiello E, Testa A, Pederzoli P, Falconi M, Gallo C, Di Maio M, Perrone F, Gruppo Oncologico Italia Meridionale (GOIM), Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dei Carcinomi dell’Apparato Digerente (GISCAD), Gruppo Oncologico Italiano di Ricerca Clinica (GOIRC). Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin compared with single-agent gemcitabine as first line treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: the GIP-1 study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1645–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Philip PA, Benedetti J, Corless CL, Wong R, O’Reilly EM, Flynn PJ, Rowland KM, Atkins JN, Mirtsching BC, Rivkin SE, Khorana AA, Goldman B, Fenoglio-Preiser CM, Abbruzzese JL, Blanke CD. Phase III study comparing gemcitabine plus cetuximab versus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: southwest Oncology Group– directed intergroup trial S0205. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3605–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 7.Homma H, Doi T, Mezawa S, Takada K, Kukitsu T, Oku T, Akiyama T, Kusakabe T, Miyanishi K, Niitsu Y. A novel arterial infusion chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma after vascular supply distribution via superselective embolization. Cancer. 2000;89:303–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Tanaka T, Yamamoto K, Sho M, Nishiofuku H, Inoue M, Sueyoshi S, Anai H, Sakaguchi H, Nakajima Y, Kichikawa K. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of pancreatic arterial infusion chemotherapy after unification of the blood supply in an animal model. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21:116–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Pingpank JF, Libutti SK, Chang R, Wood BJ, Neeman Z, Kam AW, Figg WD, Zhai S, Beresneva T, Seidel GD, Alexander HR. Phase I study of hepatic arterial melphalan infusion and hepatic venous hemofiltration using percutaneously placed catheters in patients with unresectable hepatic malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3465–74.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.van Iersel LB, Gelderblom H, Vahrmeijer AL, van Persijn van Meerten EL, Tijl FG, Putter H, Hartgrink HH, Kuppen PJ, Nortier JW, Tollenaar RA, van de Velde CJ. Isolated hepatic melphalan perfusion of colorectal liver metastases: outcome and prognostic factors in 154 patients. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:1127–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Murata S, Onozawa S, Sugihara F, Sakamoto A, Ueda T, Yamaguchi H, Yasui D, Mine T, Kumita S. Feasibility and safety of negative-balance isolated pelvic perfusion in patients with pretreated recurrent or persistent uterine cervical cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(12):3981–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Tanaka T, Sakaguchi H, Anai H, Yamamoto K, Morimoto K, Nishiofuku H, Kichikawa K. Catheter position for adequate intra-arterial chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: evaluation with CT during arterial injection of contrast material. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;15:1089–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar