Intra-arterial EmboCept S® and DC Bead® effectively inhibit tumor growth of colorectal rat liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Intra-arterial therapy with embolics is established for the treatment of malignancies of the liver. However, there are no studies comparing the different effects of various embolics used in clinical practice. Herein, we analyzed the effect of 3 different embolics on tumor growth in a rat model of colorectal liver metastases. METHODS: Eight days after subcapsular implantation of 5 × 105 colorectal cancer cells (CC531) in the left liver lobe of WAG/Rij rats were randomized into 4 groups (n = 8) and underwent intra-arterial hepatic therapy. Animals received either EmboCept S®, DC Bead® or Lipiodol® Ultra-Fluid. Animals of the control group received a comparable amount of saline. Tumor growth was measured on day 8 and 11 using a three-dimensional 40 MHz ultrasound device. On day 11 tumor and liver tissue were removed for histological and immunohistochemical analyses. RESULTS: On day 11 animals of the control group showed a tumor growth of ~ 60% compared to day 8. Application of Lipiodol Ultra-Fluid® did not significantly influence tumor growth (~ 40%). In contrast, treatment with EmboCept S® or DC Bead® completely inhibited tumor growth. Of interest, application of EmboCept S® did not only completely inhibit tumor growth but even decreased tumor size. Immunohistochemical analysis showed a significant increase of necrotic areas within the tumors after application of EmboCept S® and DC Bead® compared to Lipiodol® Ultra-Fluid. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates that an intra-arterial therapy with EmboCept S® and DC Bead®, but not Lipiodol® Ultra-Fluid, results in a complete inhibition of rat colorectal liver metastatic growth.

Leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava: A case report of a rare tumor entity.

INTRODUCTION: Leiomyosarcomas are rare and heterogeneous group of tumors that account for less than 1% of adult malignancies. More than 50% of all vascular leiomyosarcomas occur in the lower part of vena cava. Since the first description of Perl and Virchow in 1871, only approximately 450 cases have been reported in literature. PRESENTATION OF CASE: The patient presented due to abdominal pain and weight loss. Based on the imaging evaluations a retroduodenal tumor with compression of the inferior vena cava was observed. In the explorative laparotomy a leiomyosarcoma originating from the inferior vena cava was identified. Considering the extensive intramural and intraluminal tumor manifestation, the patient underwent a segmental resection of the vena cava. Reconstruction was achieved by implanting a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) prosthesis. Postoperatively a stenosis developed due to a pericaval haematoma with consecutive compression of the prosthesis. An angiographic implantation of a stent was successfully performed. In the 24-month follow-up, the patient is free of symptoms and tumors. DISCUSSION: Leiomyosarcomas of the vena cava are classified anatomically according to their relationship to the liver and renal vessels. The clinical symptoms depend on the affected segment. The therapy of choice is radical en bloc tumor resection. After resection, the options for reconstruction include placement of a synthetic graft, primary repair and patch repair. CONCLUSION: Due to a variety of topographic and tumor biological sarcoma manifestations, no standard has been established for the resection of this entity. The extent of resection should be planned individually.