Advertisement

Improved Local Tumor Control and Survival Rates by Obtaining a 3D-Safety Margin in Superselective Transarterial Chemoembolization for Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma

  • Thanate Kattipatanapong
  • Hideyuki NishiofukuEmail author
  • Toshihiro Tanaka
  • Takeshi Sato
  • Tetsuya Masada
  • Shota Tatsumoto
  • Takeshi Matsumoto
  • Kimihiko Kichikawa
Clinical Investigation Interventional Oncology
First Online:
  • 34 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Interventional Oncology

Abstract

Objective

To investigate technical factors affecting local tumor control of small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated by superselective conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE) using lipiodol and to compare prognoses between groups with and without these factors.

Materials and Methods

Sixty-three consecutive patients with 73 HCC nodules (diameter, 1–3 cm) treated by cTACE were retrospectively analyzed. A positive or a negative 3D-safety margin was defined as a ≥ 1-mm area of lipiodol accumulation or as a diameter of lipiodol accumulation < 1 mm in liver parenchyma surrounding the tumor using plain CT images obtained within a week after TACE. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to identify technical factors determining local tumor control rate. Subgroup analysis of survival rates in treatment-naïve patients was performed according to the detected factors.

Results

In univariate analyses, three-dimensional (3D)-safety margin and portal vein visualization were associated with local tumor control rates. In multivariate analysis, only positive 3D-safety margin remained a significant contributor (p = 0.001). Two-year cumulative local disease-free survival rates with positive and negative 3D-safety margin were 82.8% and 19.3%, respectively (p = 0.001). In subgroup survival analysis of the 36 newly diagnosed patients, the 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year cumulative OS rates for patients with and without positive margins were 100% versus 100%, 96.4% versus 75.0%, 81.8% versus 62.5%, 74.4% versus 41.7%, and 47.0% versus 0%, respectively (median survival time; 57.6 months vs. 37.1, p = 0.047).

Conclusion

Obtaining a 3D-safety margin can suppress local tumor recurrence and prolong survival in superselective cTACE for small HCC.

Keywords

Three-dimensional safety margin Transarterial chemoembolization Hepatocellular carcinoma Prognosis Recurrence Ethiodized oil 

Abbreviation

HCC

Hepatocellular carcinoma

cTACE

Conventional transarterial chemoembolization

TACE

Transarterial chemoembolization

RFA

Radiofrequency ablation

3D

Three dimensional

CT

Computed tomography

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

MPR

Multi-planar reconstruction

DFS

Local disease-free survival

OS

Overall survival

AST

Aspartate aminotransferase

ALT

Alanine aminotransferase

T-Bil

Total bilirubin

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Prof. Kichikawa in Nara Medical University. The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients in this study. Methodology: This paper is retrospective study at single institution. UMIN ID; R000029341.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhu RX, Seto WK, Lai CL, Yuen MF. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma in the Asia-Pacific Region. Gut Liver. 2016;10:332–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kudo M. Clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma differ between Japan, United States, and Europe. Liver Cancer. 2015;4:85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raoul JL, Sangro B, Forner A, et al. Evolving strategies for the management of intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: available evidence and expert opinion on the use of transarterial chemoembolization. Cancer Treat Rev. 2011;37:212–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kokudo N, Hasegawa K, Akahane M, et al. Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma: the Japan Society of Hepatology 2013 update (3rd JSH-HCC Guidelines). Hepatol Res. 2015.  https://doi.org/10.1111/hepr.12464.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lu WP, Dong JH. Hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of liver transplantation. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:9237–44.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crocetti L, de Baere T, Lencioni R. Quality improvement guidelines for radiofrequency ablation of liver tumours. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2010;33:11–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Takayasu K, Arii S, Kudo M, et al. Superselective transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. Validation of treatment algorithm proposed by Japanese guidelines. J Hepatol. 2012;56(4):886–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Park JW, Chen M, Colombo M, et al. Global patterns of hepatocellular carcinoma management from diagnosis to death: the BRIDGE Study. Liver Int. 2015;35(9):2155–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miyayama S, Matsui O, Yamashiro M, et al. Ultraselective transcatheter arterial chemoembolization with a 2-f tip microcatheter for small hepatocellular carcinomas: relationship between local tumor recurrence and visualization of the portal vein with iodized oil. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2007;18:365–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miyayama S, Yamashiro M, Hashimoto M, et al. Comparison of local control in transcatheter arterial chemoembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma  </= 6 cm with or without intraprocedural monitoring of the embolized area using cone-beam computed tomography. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014;37:388–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nishimine K, Uchida H, Matsuo N, et al. Segmental transarterial chemoembolization with Lipiodol mixed with anticancer drugs for nonresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: follow-up CT and therapeutic results. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 1994;33(Suppl):S60–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kang HJ, Kim YI, Kim HC, Jae HJ, Hur S, Chung JW. Does establishing a safety margin reduce local recurrence in subsegmental transarterial chemoembolization for small nodular hepatocellular carcinomas? Korean J Radiol. 2015;16:1068–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nakazawa T, Kokubu S, Shibuya A, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation between local tumor progression after ablation and ablative margin. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:480–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tajima T, Nishie A, Asayama Y, et al. Safety margins of hepatocellular carcinoma demonstrated by 3-dimensional fused images of computed tomographic hepatic arteriography/unenhanced computed tomography: prognostic significance in patients who underwent transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:712–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jiang C, Liu B, Chen S, Peng Z, Xie X, Kuang M. Safety margin after radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: precise assessment with a three-dimensional reconstruction technique using CT imaging. Int J Hyperth. 2018;34(8):1135–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uchida H, Ohishi H, Matsuo N, et al. Transcatheter hepatic segmental arterial embolization using Lipiodol mixed with an anticancer drug and Gelfoam particles for hepatocellular carcinoma. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1990;13:140–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Miyayama S, Matsui O. Superselective conventional transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: rationale, technique, and outcome. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27:1269–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matsui O, Kadoya M, Yoshikawa J, et al. Small hepatocellular carcinoma: treatment with subsegmental transcatheter arterial embolization. Radiology. 1993;188:79–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sasaki A, Kai S, Iwashita Y, Hirano S, Ohta M, Kitano S. Microsatellite distribution and indication for locoregional therapy in small hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;103:299–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shi M, Zhang CQ, Zhang YQ, Liang XM, Li JQ. Micrometastases of solitary hepatocellular carcinoma and appropriate resection margin. World J Surg. 2004;28:376–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lafaro K, Grandhi MS, Herman JM, Pawlik TM. The importance of surgical margins in primary malignancies of the liver. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113:296–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Llovet JM, Ducreux M, Lencioni R, Di Bisceglie AM, Galle PR, Dufour JF. European association for the study of the liver, European organisation for research and treatment of cancer. EASL–EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2012;56:908–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shi M, Guo RP, Lin XJ, et al. Partial hepatectomy with wide versus narrow resection margin for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2007;245:36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chau GY, Lui WY, Tsay SH, et al. Prognostic significance of surgical margin in hepatocellular carcinoma resection: an analysis of 165 Childs’ a patients. J Surg Oncol. 1997;66:122–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xu L, Shi M, Zhang YQ, Li JQ. Influence of surgical resection margin in hepatectomy on survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2006;28:47–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kim YS, Lee WJ, Rhim H, Lim HK, Choi D, Lee JY. The minimal ablative margin of radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma (> 2 and < 5 cm) needed to prevent local tumor progression: 3D quantitative assessment using CT image fusion. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:758–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Teng W, Liu KW, Lin CC, et al. Insufficient ablative margin determined by early computed tomography may predict the recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma after radiofrequency ablation. Liver Cancer. 2015;4:26–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Arimura E, Kotoh K, Nakamuta M, Morizono S, Enjoji M, Nawata H. Local recurrence is an important prognostic factor of hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2005;11:5601–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jeong SO, Kim EB, Jeong SW, et al. Predictive factors for complete response and recurrence after transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma. Gut Liver. 2017;11:409–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Miyayama S. Ultraselective conventional transarterial chemoembolization: when and how? Clin Mol Hepatol. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2019.0016.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Takayasu K, Wakao F, Moriyama N, et al. Response of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma and borderline lesions to therapeutic arterial embolization. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993;160:301–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Morimoto M, Numata K, Sugimori K, et al. Successful initial ablation therapy contributes to survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:1003–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hocquelet A, Seror O, Blanc JF, et al. Transarterial chemoembolization for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma decrease local tumor control and overall survival compared to radiofrequency ablation. Oncotarget. 2017;8:32190–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yang HJ, Lee JH, Lee DH, et al. Small single-nodule hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of transarterial chemoembolization, radiofrequency ablation, and hepatic resection by using inverse probability weighting. Radiology. 2014;271:909–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lee HJ, Kim JW, Hur YH, et al. Combined therapy of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation versus surgical resection for single 2–3 cm hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity-score matching analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2017;9:1240–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lee IJ, Lee JH, Lee YB, et al. Effectiveness of drug-eluting bead transarterial chemoembolization versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization for small hepatocellular carcinoma in Child-Pugh class a patients. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2019;11:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tohme S, Bou Samra P, Kaltenmeier C, et al. Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a nationwide 10-Year experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2018;7:912–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thanate Kattipatanapong
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hideyuki Nishiofuku
    • 1
    Email author
  • Toshihiro Tanaka
    • 1
  • Takeshi Sato
    • 1
  • Tetsuya Masada
    • 1
  • Shota Tatsumoto
    • 1
  • Takeshi Matsumoto
    • 1
  • Kimihiko Kichikawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and IVR CenterNara Medical UniversityKashiharaThailand
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyChiang Mai UniversityChiang MaiThailand

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options