MRI in addition to CT in patients scheduled for local therapy of colorectal liver metastases (CAMINO): an international, multicentre, prospective, diagnostic accuracy trial.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines are inconclusive on whether contrast-enhanced MRI using gadoxetic acid and diffusion-weighted imaging should be added routinely to CT in the investigation of patients with colorectal liver metastases who are scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation, or both. Although contrast-enhanced MRI is reportedly superior than contrast-enhanced CT in the detection and characterisation of colorectal liver metastases, its effect on clinical patient management is unknown. We aimed to assess the clinical effect of an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI on local treatment plan in patients with colorectal liver metastases amenable to local treatment, based on contrast-enhanced CT. METHODS: We did an international, multicentre, prospective, incremental diagnostic accuracy trial in 14 liver surgery centres in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. Participants were aged 18 years or older with histological proof of colorectal cancer, a WHO performance status score of 0-4, and primary or recurrent colorectal liver metastases, who were scheduled for local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. All patients had contrast-enhanced CT and liver contrast-enhanced MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging and gadoxetic acid as a contrast agent before undergoing local therapy. The primary outcome was change in the local clinical treatment plan (decided by the individual clinics) on the basis of liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings, analysed in the intention-to-image population. The minimal clinically important difference in the proportion of patients who would have change in their local treatment plan due to an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI was 10%. This study is closed and registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL8039. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 31, 2021, 325 patients with colorectal liver metastases were assessed for eligibility. 298 patients were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat population, including 177 males (59%) and 121 females (41%) with planned local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. A change in the local treatment plan based on liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings was observed in 92 (31%; 95% CI 26-36) of 298 patients. Changes were made for 40 patients (13%) requiring more extensive local therapy, 11 patients (4%) requiring less extensive local therapy, and 34 patients (11%) in whom the indication for curative-intent local therapy was revoked, including 26 patients (9%) with too extensive disease and eight patients (3%) with benign lesions on liver contrast-enhanced MRI (confirmed by a median follow-up of 21·0 months [IQR 17·5-24·0]). INTERPRETATION: Liver contrast-enhanced MRI should be considered in all patients scheduled for local treatment for colorectal liver metastases on the basis of contrast-enhanced CT imaging. FUNDING: The Dutch Cancer Society and Bayer AG - Pharmaceuticals.

Combined Ablation and Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases in the Minimally Invasive Surgical Era.

BACKGROUND: Thermal ablation is an accepted treatment modality for small and central liver tumors. In extensive colorectal liver metastatic disease (CRLM), hepatectomy can be combined with ablation, resulting in a parenchymal-sparing strategy. This may increase salvageability rates in case of recurrence. METHODS: All patients with advanced CRLM that underwent combined ablation and resection between April 2012 and April 2021, were retrospectively analyzed from a prospectively maintained database. Primary endpoints include postoperative 30-day morbidity and ablation-site recurrence (ASR). The surgical approaches were compared. Ablated lesions were screened for ASR on postoperative follow-up imaging. RESULTS: Of 54 patients that underwent combined ablation and resection, 32 (59.3%) were performed through a minimally invasive approach. Eleven (20.4%) were minor resections, 32 (59.3%) were technically major and 11 (20.4%) were anatomically major resections. Twelve complications occurred (22.2%), among which 2 (3.8%) major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥IIIa). Ninety-day mortality rate was 1.9%. Out of 82 ablated lesions, 6 ASRs (11.1%) occurred. Median blood loss was significantly lower in the minimally invasive group, compared with open [90 mL (32.5 to 200) vs. 200 mL (100 to 400), P =0.005]. Pringle maneuver was significantly performed less in the minimally invasive group [8 (25.0%) vs. 16 (72.7%), P =0.001], but took more time [36.1 min (±15.6) vs. 21.6 (±9.9); P =0.011]. Short-term (1 y) overall and disease-free survival were respectively 81.4% and 50.0%. CONCLUSION: Combining microwave ablation and liver resection is a feasible and safe parenchymal-sparing technique, through both minimally invasive and open approach for treating extended CRLM disease. It has a low ablation-related complication rate and acceptable ablation-site recurrence rate.

Distinction between contrast staining and hemorrhage after endovascular stroke treatment: one CT is not enough.

BACKGROUND: Postinterventional cerebral hyperdensities (PCHDs) are a common finding after endovascular stroke treatment. There is uncertainty about the extent to which PCHDs correspond to hemorrhage or contrast staining. Our aim was to evaluate the use of PCHD density on immediate postinterventional CT, and PCHD evolution on follow-up CT for differentiating contrast staining from hemorrhage after endovascular treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the imaging data of 84 patients who underwent endovascular treatment for acute arterial ischemic stroke in the anterior circulation and who received an immediate postinterventional CT, a follow-up CT within 36 h, and a follow-up MRI within 10 days. RESULTS: PCHDs were seen in 62 of 84 patients in a total of 130 Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) areas. A specificity of 100% to predict hemorrhage was only seen for PCHDs with densities <40 HU (for ruling hemorrhage out) and ≥140 HU (for ruling hemorrhage in), at the cost of a low sensitivity of 1.1% and 2.4%, respectively. Persisting PCHDs correlated with hemorrhage with a specificity of 93.3% and a sensitivity of 62.5%. When follow-up CT was performed at least 19 h after the first CT, persisting PCHDs correlated with hemorrhage with a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 62.5%. CONCLUSIONS: There are no density thresholds for PCHDs that allow predicting the absence or presence of hemorrhage with 100% specificity and acceptable sensitivity. A CT scan performed at least 19-24 h after endovascular therapy is the only reliable method to differentiate contrast staining from hemorrhage.

Chronic cluster headache and the pituitary gland.

BACKGROUND: Cluster headache is classified as a primary headache by definition not caused by an underlying pathology. However, symptomatic cases of otherwise typical cluster headache have been reported. CASE PRESENTATION: A 47-year-old male suffered from primary chronic cluster headache (CCH, ICHD-3 beta criteria fulfilled) since the age of 35 years. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study of the brain in 2006 came back normal. He tried several prophylactic treatments but was never longer than 1 month without attacks. He was under chronic treatment with verapamil with only a limited effect on the attack frequency. Subcutaneous sumatriptan 6 mg injections were very effective in aborting attacks. By February 2014 the patient developed a continuous interictal pain ipsilateral to the right-sided cluster headache attacks. An indomethacin test (up to 225 mg/day orally) was negative. Because of the change in headache pattern we performed a new brain MRI, which showed a cystic structure in the pituitary gland. The differential diagnosis was between a Rathke cleft cyst and a cystic adenoma. Pituitary function tests showed an elevated serum prolactin level. A dopamine agonist (cabergoline) was started and the headache subsided completely. Potential pathophysiological mechanisms of pituitary tumor-associated headache are discussed. CONCLUSION: Neuroimaging should be considered in all patients with CCH, especially those with an atypical presentation or evolution. Response to acute treatment does not exclude a secondary form of cluster headache. There may be shared pathophysiological mechanisms of primary and secondary cluster headache.