Safety margin assessment after microwave ablation of liver tumors: inter- and intrareader variability
Article Category: Research Article
Published Online: Feb 12, 2020
Page range: 57 - 61
Received: Sep 16, 2019
Accepted: Jan 10, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/raon-2020-0004
© 2020 Jan Schaible, Benedikt Pregler, Wolf Bäumler, Ingo Einspieler, Ernst-Michael Jung, Christian Stroszczynski, Lukas Philipp Beyer, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Background
The aim of the study was to evaluate the inter- and intrareader variability of the safety margin assessment after microwave ablation of liver tumors using post-procedure computed tomography (CT) images as well as to determine the sensitivity and specificity of identification remnant tumor tissue.
Patients and methods
A retrospective analysis of 58 patients who underwent microwave ablation (MWA) of primary or secondary liver malignancies (46 hepatocellular carcinoma, 9 metastases of a colorectal cancer and 3 metastases of pancreatic cancer) between September 2017 and June 2019 was conducted. Three readers estimated the minimal safety margin in millimeters using side-by-side comparison of the 1-day pre-ablation CT and 1-day post-ablation CT and judged whether ablation was complete or incomplete. One reader estimated the safety margin again after 6 weeks. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after 6 weeks was the gold standard.
Results
The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for estimation of the minimal safety margin of all three readers was 0.357 (95%-confidence interval 0.194–0.522). The ICC for repeated assessment (reader 1) was 0.774 (95%-confidence interval 0.645–0.860). Sensitivity and specificity of the detection of complete tumor ablation, defined as no remnant tumor tissue in 6 weeks follow-up MRI, were 93%/82%/82% and 33%/17%/83%, respectively.
Conclusions
In clinical practice, the safety margin after liver tumor ablation is often assessed using side-by-side comparison of CT images. In the study, we were able to show, that this technique has a poor reliability (ICC 0.357). From our point of view, this proves the necessity of new technical procedures for the assessment of the safety distance.