Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters

Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Int J Hyperthermia ; 41(1): 2323152, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38465646

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to develop nomograms for predicting repeat intrahepatic recurrence (rIHR) and overall survival (OS), after radiofrequency ablation (RFA), treatment in patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases (CLMs) after hepatectomy based on clinicopathologic features. METHODS: A total of 160 consecutive patients with recurrent CLMs after hepatectomy who were treated with ultrasound-guided percutaneous RFA from 2012 to 2022 were retrospectively included. Patients were randomly divided into a training cohort and a validation cohort, with a ratio of 8:2. Potential prognostic factors associated with rIHR and OS, after RFA, were identified by using the competing-risks and Cox proportional hazard models, respectively, and were used to construct the nomogram. The nomogram was evaluated by Harrell's C-index and a calibration curve. RESULTS: The 1-, 2-, and 3-year rIHR rates after RFA were 58.8%, 70.2%, and 74.2%, respectively. The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 96.3%, 60.4%, and 38.5%, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, mutant RAS, interval from hepatectomy to intrahepatic recurrence ≤ 12 months, CEA level >5 ng/ml, and ablation margin <5 mm were the independent predictive factors for rIHR. Mutant RAS, largest CLM at hepatectomy >3 cm, CEA level >5 ng/ml, and extrahepatic disease were independent predictors of poor OS. Two nomograms for rIHR and OS were constructed using the respective significant variables. In both cohorts, the nomogram demonstrated good discrimination and calibration. CONCLUSIONS: The established nomograms can predict individual risk of rIHR and OS after RFA for recurrent CLMs and contribute to improving individualized management.


Subject(s)
Catheter Ablation , Colorectal Neoplasms , Liver Neoplasms , Radiofrequency Ablation , Humans , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Nomograms , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies
2.
Ultrasound Med Biol ; 50(4): 502-508, 2024 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38246805

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the work described here was to explore a potential method for improving the diagnostic detection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) based on the contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) Version 2017. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 585 liver nodules in 427 patients at risk for HCC from December 2020 to March 2023. The nodules were categorized as LR-1 to LR-M based on CEUS LI-RADS Version 2017 and were randomly subclassified into a developmental cohort (DC) and a validation cohort (VC) at 3:1. In the DC, the cutoff value of the time difference (∆T) for differentiating HCC from other malignancies by LR-M was calculated and used to reclassify nodules in the VC. The diagnostic effect on HCC detection before and after reclassification was further assessed. RESULTS: According to the current CEUS LI-RADS, 140 of 426 (32.9%) confirmed HCC nodules were misclassified as LR-M. In the DC (439 nodules), the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve revealed that the cutoff value of ∆T (wash-out onset time minus contrast arrival time) recommended for HCC diagnosis was greater than 21 s. In the VC (146 nodules), 34 HCCs were correctly categorized as LR-5 according to the cutoff value, and after reclassification, LR-5 had higher accuracy (67.1% vs. 89.0%, p < 0.001) and sensitivity (56.0% vs. 87.2%, p < 0.001) for HCC diagnosis with high specificity (100% vs. 94.6%, p = 0.500). CONCLUSION: Using the time difference method could identify HCC nodules misdiagnosed as LR-M and improve the diagnostic performance of current CEUS LI-RADS.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Hepatocellular , Liver Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology , Liver Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Liver Neoplasms/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Contrast Media , Reproducibility of Results , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL