Hepatic Hilar Nerve Block for Adjunctive Analgesia during Percutaneous Thermal Ablation of Hepatic Tumors: A Retrospective Analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine whether hepatic hilar nerve block techniques reduce analgesic and sedation requirements during percutaneous image-guided thermal ablation of hepatic tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort analysis was performed of 177 patients (median age, 67 years; range, 33-86 years) who underwent percutaneous image-guided thermal ablation of liver tumors. All patients were treated utilizing local anesthetic and moderate sedation between November 2018 and November 2021 at a tertiary level hospital, with or without the administration of a hepatic hilar nerve block. Univariable and multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to determine the relationship between the administration of the hilar nerve block and fentanyl and midazolam dosages. RESULTS: A total of 114 (64%) patients received a hilar nerve block in addition to procedural sedation, and 63 (36%) patients received procedural sedation alone. There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic and tumor characteristics between the cohorts. The procedure duration was longer in the hilar block cohort than in the unblocked cohort (median, 95 vs 82 minutes; P = .0012). The technical success rate (98% in both the cohorts, P = .93) and adverse event rate (11% vs 3%, P = .14) were not significantly different between the cohorts. After adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, ablation modality, and procedure and ablation durations, hilar nerve blocks were associated with lower fentanyl (-18.4%, P = .0045) and midazolam (-22.7%, P = .0007) dosages. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic hilar nerve blocks significantly decrease the fentanyl and midazolam requirements during thermal ablation of hepatic tumors, without a significant change in the technical success or adverse event rates.

Unsuspected Pregnancies in Hysterosalpingography: Implementation and Review of a Multi-Institutional Pre-Procedural Pregnancy Screening Protocol.

PURPOSE: Owing to the increasing average age of first-time mothers, as well as advances in assistive reproductive technology, the number of hysterosalpingography (HSG) requests has continued to rise. This increases the likelihood of patients presenting with unsuspected early pregnancies prior to HSG. Currently, there is no standard of practice for the pre-procedural screening of pregnancy prior to HSG, with most institutions using patient-reported pregnancy status and unreliable menstrual cycle dating methods. We implemented a multi-institutional pre-procedural pregnancy screening protocol in order to determine the rate of unsuspected pregnancies prior to HSG and improve the quality and safety of these procedures. METHODS: Following multi-institutional and multidisciplinary input, a consensus protocol was formulated and implemented across 9 institutions in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, Canada. Subsequent tracking of pregnancy testing was then performed over a period of 3 years. RESULTS: Pre-implementation review of protocols demonstrated large disparities between institutions. A total of 6333 HSG examinations were scheduled in the review period following implementation. Of these, 10 patients were found to have positive pregnancy tests (0.16%), despite self-reporting that they were not pregnant or had recent menstrual bleeding. DISCUSSION: Hysterosalpingography is contraindicated in pregnancy, yet we identified 10 unsuspected pregnancies in patients who would have otherwise undergone HSG examinations with existing guidelines. While there remains insufficient data on the deleterious effects of performing HSG on an unsuspected pregnancy, the potential physical, economical, and psychosocial consequences of performing an HSG during pregnancy are sufficient to merit consideration of relatively inexpensive routine pregnancy screening prior to HSG.

How well do image-defined risk factors (IDRFs) predict surgical outcomes and survival in patients with neuroblastoma? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Since their introduction to the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) staging system in 2009, the role of Image-Defined Risk Factors (IDRFs) in predicting outcomes has been studied in heterogeneous populations with varying results. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in order to determine quantitative measures of precisely how well pre-treatment IDRFs predict surgical outcomes and survival. METHODS: A systematic review was performed for studies between January 1990 and July 2019 that compared surgical outcomes and/or survival in pediatric neuroblastoma patients with one or more IDRFs to patients without IDRFs. Summary risk ratios (RR) and hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: 19 retrospective cohort studies were included, representing data from 1132 patients. The risk ratio (RR) of incomplete surgical resection in IDRF-positive patients compared to IDRF-negative patients was 2.45 (95% CI 1.51-3.97). The RR of surgical complications was 2.30 (95% CI 1.46-3.61). The hazard ratio (HR) for 5-year EFS was 2.08 (95% CI 2.93-4.13) while the 5-year HR for OS was 2.44 (95% CI 1.46-4.08). CONCLUSION: IDRF-positive neuroblastoma patients have a higher risk of incomplete surgical resection, surgical complications, and 5-year mortality and/or relapse. Our results affirm that IDRFs remain a useful prognostic tool for neuroblastoma patients both for short and long-term outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Transapical Coil Embolization of a Postsurgical Ascending Thoracic Aortic Pseudoaneurysm.

Ascending aortic pseudoaneurysms are a rare but potentially life-threatening complication of aortic root or cardiac surgery. Surgical repair is established as first-line treatment; however, patient comorbidities, technical considerations, and anatomic limitations often preclude patients from repeat surgery, thus necessitating alternative approaches. Here, we present a case of coil embolization of an ascending aortic pseudoaneurysm via a transapical approach in a particularly complex scenario where percutaneous and peripheral access was technically unfeasible.

Comparison of image noise and image quality between full-dose abdominal computed tomography scans reconstructed with weighted filtered back projection and half-dose scans reconstructed with improved sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE*).

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare the image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and subjective image quality between CT images acquired with a dual-source, split-dose imaging protocol reconstructed at full and half doses with weighted filtered back projection (wFBP) and an improved sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction algorithm (SAFIRE*). METHODS: Fifty-three consecutive patients underwent contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen using a standardized dual-source, single energy CT protocol. Half-dose images were retrospectively generated using data from one detector only. Full-dose datasets were reconstructed with wFBP, while half-dose datasets were reconstructed with wFBP and SAFIRE* strengths 1-5. Region of interest analysis was performed to assess SNR and noise. Diagnostic acceptability, subjective noise, and spatial resolution were graded on a 10-point scale by two readers. Statistical analysis was carried out with repeated measures analysis of variance, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and Cohen's κ test. RESULTS: With the increasing strengths of SAFIRE*, a progressive reduction in noise and increase in SNR (p < 0.01) was observed. There was a statistically significant decrease in objective noise and increase in SNR in half-dose SAFIRE* strength 4 and 5 reconstructions compared to full-dose reconstructions using wFBP (p < 0.01). Qualitative analysis revealed a progressive increase in diagnostic acceptability, decrease in subjective noise and increase in spatial resolution for half-dose images reconstructed with the increasing strengths of SAFIRE* (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Half-dose CT images reconstructed with SAFIRE* at strength 4 and 5 have superior image quality compared to full-dose images reconstructed with wFBP. SAFIRE* potentially allows dose reductions in the order of 50% over wFBP.