Benefits and advances of Cone Beam CT use in prostatic artery embolization: review of the literature and pictorial essay.

Prostatic artery embolization (PAE) has proven to be an efficacious treatment for urinary symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia. PAE is performed in a complex and challenging anatomical field which may pose difficulties from procedural standpoint. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been proposed as an invaluable tool during the PAE procedure. A review of different techniques and advancements, as well as demonstration of CBCT benefits via a pictorial overview of the salient examples is lacking. The techniques of CBCT are discussed herein and the virtual injection technology as an advancement in CBCT is discussed. To show the merits of CBCT in PAE, a pictorial overview of various clinical scenarios is presented where CBCT can be crucial in decision making. These scenarios are aimed at showing different benefits including identification of the origin of the prostatic artery and avoiding non-target embolization. Other benefits may include ensuring complete embolization of entire prostate gland as angiographic appearance alone can be inconclusive if it mimics a severely thickened bladder wall or ensuring adequate embolization of the median lobe to provide relief from "ball-valve" effect. Further examples include verification of embolization of the entire prostate when rare variants or multiple (> 2) arterial feeders are present.

Accuracy of a CBCT-based virtual injection software for vessel detection during hepatic arterial embolization.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy, sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV) and interobserver agreement of a virtual injection (VI) software that simulates selective arterial injection from nonselective cone-beam CT (CBCT) arteriography. METHODS: From March 2019 to May 2020, 20 consecutive patients in whom a nonselective injected CBCT and a selective CT angiography (CTA) were completed in the same procedure, were retrospectively included. The position of the microcatheter tip used for selective CTA injection was identified. The VI was simulated from the exact same point on the nonselective CBCT and the two volumes were merged. VI was compared to the real injection on the selective CTA. Three interventional radiologists evaluated the accuracy using a 6-point scale (Perfect; Good; Fair; Incorrect Origin; False Negative; Non existing). Sensitivity, PPV, and Fleiss' kappa were calculated. Numerical variables were presented as means ± standard deviations. RESULTS: Twenty procedures and 195 vessel segments were analyzed. Most vessels were 4th order (57/195; 29%) and 5th order (96/195; 49%). VI was classified as perfect to good in 96.8% ± 1.4 of 1st-3rd order arteries and in 83.4% ± 0.4 of 4th-5th order arteries. Interobserver agreement was substantial (Fleiss' kappa = 0.79; 95% confidence interval = 0.73-0.84, P < 0.01). False negatives were reported with a mean of 9.4% ± 0.3. Average sensitivity was 90.6% ± 0.3 and average PPV was 92.7% ± 0.02. Fourteen false positives were noted. CONCLUSION: CBCT-based VI software accurately simulated distal injections in the liver with high sensitivity and a substantial interobserver agreement.

Simulation of superselective catheterization for cerebrovascular lesions using a virtual injection software.

BACKGROUND: This report addresses the feasibility of virtual injection software based on contrast-enhanced cone-beam CTs (CBCTs) in the context of cerebrovascular lesion embolization. Intracranial arteriovenous malformation (AVM), dural arteriovenous fistula (AVF) and mycotic aneurysm embolization cases with CBCTs performed between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Cerebrovascular lesions were reviewed by 2 neurointerventionalists using a dedicated virtual injection software (EmboASSIST, GE Healthcare; Chicago, IL). Points of Interest (POIs) surrounding the vascular lesions were first identified. The software then automatically displayed POI-associated vascular traces from vessel roots to selected POIs. Vascular segments and reason for POI identification were recorded. Using 2D multiplanar reconstructions from CBCTs, the accuracy of vascular traces was assessed. Clinical utility metrics were recorded on a 3-point Likert scale from 1 (no benefit) to 3 (very beneficial). RESULTS: Nine cases (7 AVM, 1 AVF, 1 mycotic aneurysm) were reviewed, with 26 POIs selected. Three POIs were in 2nd order segments, 8 POIs in 3rd order segments and 15 POIs in 4th order segments of their respective arteries. The reviewers rated all 26 POI traces - involving a total of 90 vascular segments - as accurate. The average utility score across the 8 questions were 2.7 and 2.8 respectively from each reviewer, acknowledging the software's potential benefit in cerebrovascular embolization procedural planning. CONCLUSION: The operators considered CBCT-based virtual injection software clinically useful and accurate in guiding and planning cerebrovascular lesion embolization in this retrospective review. Future prospective studies in larger cohorts are warranted for validation of this modality.