Comparison of Cone-Beam Tomography and Cross-Sectional Imaging for Volumetric and Dosimetric Calculations in Resin Yttrium-90 Radioembolization
- 1 Downloads
To compare the use of cone-beam computed tomography versus contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the calculation of liver volume and planned dose for yttrium-90 radioembolization.
Materials and Methods
The study retrospectively assessed 47 consecutive patients who underwent resin Y-90 radioembolization consecutively over a 2-year period at a single center. Volume calculation software was used to determine perfused lobar liver volumes from cone-beam CT (CBCT) images obtained during mapping angiography. CBCT-derived volumes were compared with perfused lobar volume derived from contrast-enhanced CT and MRI. Nominal activities as determined by the SIR-Spheres Microspheres Activity Calculator were similarly calculated and compared using both CBCT and conventionally acquired volumes.
A total of 82 hepatic lobes were assessed in 47 patients. The mean percentage difference between combined CT-MRI- and CBCT-derived calculated lobar volumes was 25.3% (p = 0.994). The mean percentage difference in calculated dose between the two methods was 21.8 ± 24.6% (p = 0.42). Combined left and right lobar CT-derived dose difference was less than 10% in 22 lobes, between 10 and 25% in 20 lobes, between 25 and 50% in 13 lobes and greater than 50% in 5 lobes. Combined left and right lobar MRI-derived dose difference was less than 10% in 11 lobes, between 10 and 25% in 7 lobes, between 25 and 50% in 2 lobes and greater than 50% in 1 lobe.
Although volume measurements derived from CT/MRI did not differ significantly from those derived from CBCT, variability between the two methods led to large and unexpected differences in calculated dose.
KeywordsCone-beam CT CBCT Y90 Radioembolization Dosimetry
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
All the authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.SIR-Spheres microspheres activity calculator North Sydney, Australia: SIRTeX Medical Ltd. [Internet]. https://apps01.sirtex.com/smac/. Accessed 1 March 2018.
- 9.Kennedy A, Nag S, Salem R, Murthy R, McEwan AJ, Nutting C, et al. Recommendations for radioembolization of hepatic malignancies using yttrium-90 microsphere brachytherapy: a consensus panel report from the radioembolization brachytherapy oncology consortium. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:13–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Miyayama S, Yamashiro M, Hashimoto M, Hashimoto N, Ikuno M, Okumura K, et al. Identification of small hepatocellular carcinoma and tumor-feeding branches with cone-beam ct guidance technology during transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24:501–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Kaufmann S, Horger T, Oelker A, Beck S, Schulze M, Nikolaou K, et al. Volume perfusion computed tomography (VPCT)-based evaluation of response to TACE using two different sized drug eluting beads in patients with nonresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: impact on tumor and liver parenchymal vascularisation. Eur J Radiol. 2015;84:2548–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Garin E, Lenoir L, Rolland Y, Edeline J, Mesbah H, Laffont S, et al. Dosimetry based on 99mTc-macroaggregated albumin SPECT/CT accurately predicts tumor response and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with 90Y-loaded glass microspheres: preliminary results. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:255–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar