Ablative margin quantification using deformable versus rigid image registration in colorectal liver metastasis thermal ablation: a retrospective single-center study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the correlation of minimal ablative margin (MAM) quantification using biomechanical deformable (DIR) versus intensity-based rigid image registration (RIR) with local outcomes following colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) thermal ablation. METHODS: This retrospective single-institution study included consecutive patients undergoing thermal ablation between May 2016 and October 2021. Patients who did not have intraprocedural pre- and post-ablation contrast-enhanced CT images for MAM quantification or follow-up period less than 1 year without residual tumor or local tumor progression (LTP) were excluded. DIR and RIR methods were used to quantify the MAM. The registration accuracy was compared using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to test MAM in predicting local tumor outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients (mean age 57; 44 men) with 139 tumors (mean diameter 1.5 cm ± 0.8 (SD)) were included. During a median follow-up of 29.4 months, there was one residual unablated tumor and the LTP rate was 17% (24/138). The ranges of DSC were 0.96-0.98 and 0.67-0.98 for DIR and RIR, respectively (p < 0.001). When using DIR, 27 (19%) tumors were partially or totally registered outside the liver, compared to 46 (33%) with RIR. Using DIR versus RIR, the corresponding median MAM was 4.7 mm versus 4.0 mm, respectively (p = 0.5). The AUC in predicting residual tumor and 1-year LTP for DIR versus RIR was 0.89 versus 0.72, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Ablative margin quantified on intra-procedural CT imaging using DIR method outperformed RIR for predicting local outcomes of CLM thermal ablation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The study supports the role of biomechanical deformable image registration as the preferred image registration method over rigid image registration for quantifying minimal ablative margins using intraprocedural contrast-enhanced CT images. KEY POINTS: • Accurate and reproducible image registration is a prerequisite for clinical application of image-based ablation confirmation methods. • When compared to intensity-based rigid image registration, biomechanical deformable image registration for minimal ablative margin quantification was more accurate for liver registration using intraprocedural contrast-enhanced CT images. • Biomechanical deformable image registration outperformed intensity-based rigid image registration for predicting local tumor outcomes following colorectal liver metastasis thermal ablation.

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters in neurosurgical patients: Retrieval rates and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval rates and clinical outcomes in neurosurgical patients and to determine patient characteristics associated with filter retrieval. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective study included 204 consecutive neurosurgical patients (120 men, 84 women; mean age 60 ± 13 years) who underwent retrievable IVC filter insertion between 1/2011-9/2013. Institutional IVC filter database review was used to identify demographic and clinical data, indication for IVC filtration, and IVC filter type. Patients were followed clinically by the neurosurgical, hematology, and interventional radiology services until removal or conversion to a permanent device. Measured outcomes included filter retrieval rates and parameters associated with device removal. RESULTS: The majority of filters were placed for venous thromboembolism (200/204, 98%). Of 204 filters, 38(19%) were retrieved at median 186 days post-placement (range 3-665 days), 112(55%) converted to permanent devices, 44(22%) patients were deceased, and 10(5%) patients were lost to follow-up after transfer to an outside healthcare facility. Patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (18% vs. 35%, p = 0.025) and malignancy (5% vs. 25%, p = 0.009) were less likely to have filters removed. Filter type (p = 0.475), gender (p = 0.221), neurosurgical procedure (p = 0.639), and insurance status (p = 0.207) did not demonstrate a significant association with filter retrieval. CONCLUSION: IVC filter retrieval rates in neurosurgical patients are low despite tracking patients clinically in a multidisciplinary setting. Those neurosurgical patients with intracranial hemorrhage or malignancy requiring IVC filters have a lower likelihood of filter retrieval and may benefit from use of permanent devices.