Ablative margin quantification using deformable versus rigid image registration in colorectal liver metastasis thermal ablation: a retrospective single-center study
European Radiology - Trang 1-10 - 2024
Tóm tắt
To investigate the correlation of minimal ablative margin (MAM) quantification using biomechanical deformable (DIR) versus intensity-based rigid image registration (RIR) with local outcomes following colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) thermal ablation. This retrospective single-institution study included consecutive patients undergoing thermal ablation between May 2016 and October 2021. Patients who did not have intraprocedural pre- and post-ablation contrast-enhanced CT images for MAM quantification or follow-up period less than 1 year without residual tumor or local tumor progression (LTP) were excluded. DIR and RIR methods were used to quantify the MAM. The registration accuracy was compared using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to test MAM in predicting local tumor outcomes. A total of 72 patients (mean age 57; 44 men) with 139 tumors (mean diameter 1.5 cm ± 0.8 (SD)) were included. During a median follow-up of 29.4 months, there was one residual unablated tumor and the LTP rate was 17% (24/138). The ranges of DSC were 0.96–0.98 and 0.67–0.98 for DIR and RIR, respectively (p < 0.001). When using DIR, 27 (19%) tumors were partially or totally registered outside the liver, compared to 46 (33%) with RIR. Using DIR versus RIR, the corresponding median MAM was 4.7 mm versus 4.0 mm, respectively (p = 0.5). The AUC in predicting residual tumor and 1-year LTP for DIR versus RIR was 0.89 versus 0.72, respectively (p < 0.001). Ablative margin quantified on intra-procedural CT imaging using DIR method outperformed RIR for predicting local outcomes of CLM thermal ablation. The study supports the role of biomechanical deformable image registration as the preferred image registration method over rigid image registration for quantifying minimal ablative margins using intraprocedural contrast-enhanced CT images. • Accurate and reproducible image registration is a prerequisite for clinical application of image-based ablation confirmation methods. • When compared to intensity-based rigid image registration, biomechanical deformable image registration for minimal ablative margin quantification was more accurate for liver registration using intraprocedural contrast-enhanced CT images. • Biomechanical deformable image registration outperformed intensity-based rigid image registration for predicting local tumor outcomes following colorectal liver metastasis thermal ablation.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Engstrand J, Nilsson H, Strömberg C, Jonas E, Freedman J (2018) Colorectal cancer liver metastases - a population-based study on incidence, management and survival. BMC Cancer 18(1):78
Kow AWC (2019) Hepatic metastasis from colorectal cancer. J Gastrointest Oncol 10(6):1274–1298
Cervantes A, Adam R, Rosello S et al (2023) Metastatic colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 34(1):10–32
Lin YM, Paolucci I, Brock KK, Odisio BC (2021) Image-guided ablation for colorectal liver metastasis: principles, current evidence, and the path forward. Cancers (Basel) 13(16):3926
Tinguely P, Ruiter SJS, Engstrand J et al (2023) A prospective multicentre trial on survival after Microwave Ablation VErsus Resection for Resectable Colorectal liver metastases (MAVERRIC). Eur J Cancer 187:65–76
Lin YM, Paolucci I, O’Connor CS et al (2023) Ablative margins of colorectal liver metastases using deformable CT image registration and autosegmentation. Radiology 307(2):e221373
Kaye EA, Cornelis FH, Petre EN et al (2019) Volumetric 3D assessment of ablation zones after thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases to improve prediction of local tumor progression. Eur Radiol 29(5):2698–2705
Laimer G, Jaschke N, Schullian P et al (2021) Volumetric assessment of the periablational safety margin after thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastases. Eur Radiol 31(9):6489–6499
Vasiniotis Kamarinos N, Gonen M et al (2022) 3D margin assessment predicts local tumor progression after ablation of colorectal cancer liver metastases. Int J Hyperthermia 39(1):880–887
Anderson BM, Lin YM, Lin EY et al (2021) A novel use of biomechanical model-based deformable image registration (DIR) for assessing colorectal liver metastases ablation outcomes. Med Phys 48(10):6226–6236
Paolucci I, Lin YM, Jones AK, Brock KK, Odisio BC (2023) Use of contrast media during CT-guided thermal ablation of colorectal liver metastasis for procedure planning is associated with improved immediate outcomes. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 46(3):327–336
Lin YM, Paolucci I, Anderson BM et al (2022) Study protocol COVER-ALL: clinical impact of a volumetric image method for confirming tumour coverage with ablation on patients with malignant liver lesions. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 45(12):1860–1867
Ahmed M, Solbiati L, Brace CL et al (2014) Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria–a 10-year update. Radiology 273(1):241–260
Anderson BM, Rigaud B, Lin YM et al (2022) Automated segmentation of colorectal liver metastasis and liver ablation on contrast-enhanced CT images. Front Oncol 12:886517
Anderson BM, Lin EY, Cardenas CE et al (2021) Automated contouring of contrast and noncontrast computed tomography liver images with fully convolutional networks. Adv Radiat Oncol 6(1):100464
Brock KK, Sharpe MB, Dawson LA, Kim SM, Jaffray DA (2005) Accuracy of finite element model-based multi-organ deformable image registration. Med Phys 32(6):1647–1659
Velec M, Moseley JL, Svensson S, Hardemark B, Jaffray DA, Brock KK (2017) Validation of biomechanical deformable image registration in the abdomen, thorax, and pelvis in a commercial radiotherapy treatment planning system. Med Phys 44(7):3407–3417
Brock KK, Mutic S, McNutt TR, Li H, Kessler ML (2017) Use of image registration and fusion algorithms and techniques in radiotherapy: report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 132. Med Phys. 44(7):e43–e76
Dice LR (1945) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26(3):297–302
Ruiter SJS, Tinguely P, Paolucci I et al (2021) 3D quantitative ablation margins for prediction of ablation site recurrence after stereotactic image-guided microwave ablation of colorectal liver metastases: a multicenter study. Front Oncol 11:757167
Brock KK, Dawson LA, Sharpe MB, Moseley DJ, Jaffray DA (2006) Feasibility of a novel deformable image registration technique to facilitate classification, targeting, and monitoring of tumor and normal tissue. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 64(4):1245–1254
Velec M, Moseley JL, Eccles CL et al (2011) Effect of breathing motion on radiotherapy dose accumulation in the abdomen using deformable registration. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 80(1):265–272
Kuznetsova S, Grendarova P, Roy S, Sinha R, Thind K, Ploquin N (2019) Structure guided deformable image registration for treatment planning CT and post stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) Primovist((R)) (Gd-EOB-DTPA) enhanced MRI. J Appl Clin Med Phys 20(12):109–118
Sen A, Anderson BM, Cazoulat G et al (2020) Accuracy of deformable image registration techniques for alignment of longitudinal cholangiocarcinoma CT images. Med Phys 47(4):1670–1679
Cazoulat G, Anderson BM, McCulloch MM, Rigaud B, Koay EJ, Brock KK (2021) Detection of vessel bifurcations in CT scans for automatic objective assessment of deformable image registration accuracy. Med Phys 48(10):5935–5946