Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Mar;12(3):1968-1976.
doi: 10.21037/qims-21-744.

A national dose analysis of guided tumor destruction: influence of sex, age, localization and destruction technique used

Matthieu Rojo  1 , Aymeric Hamard  1 , Chris Serrand  2 , Hélène de Forges  1 , Jean-Paul Beregi  1 , Joël Greffier  1 , Julien Frandon  1
Affiliations

A national dose analysis of guided tumor destruction: influence of sex, age, localization and destruction technique used

Matthieu Rojo et al. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2022 Mar.

Abstract

Background: Percutaneous destructions of tumor lesions by ablation (microwave, radiofrequency or cryoablation) under computed tomography (CT) guidance allow high efficiency with minimally-invasive techniques, and acute needle placement and follow-up during procedure. This study investigated the impact of patient and technique parameters on the dose delivered during these procedures under CT guidance.

Methods: Data were extracted from a previous nationwide retrospective study. Patients who underwent percutaneous destruction of bone lesions, abdominal and lung tumors were included. Univariate and multivariate linear regression of the dose length product (DLP) log were performed, according to patient's gender, age, lesion location, destruction technique, adjusted to the participating center.

Results: A total of 822 patients (556 men), of mean age 62±14 years, were included: 150 patients had bone lesions, 463 abdominal and 209 thoracic tumors. The mean DLP was 991.6±979.0 mGy·cm for patients with bone lesions, 2,130.7±2,051.8 mGy∙cm for abdominal tumors and 825.2±545.4 mGy·cm for lung tumors. In multivariate analysis, the age was significantly associated with higher DLP for bone (P=0.0082) but not for abdominal and thoracic lesions; the DLP was significantly higher in men for abdominal tumors (P<0.0001) while sex had no impact on the dose for bone and thoracic lesions. The dose depended on the lesion location only for bone (P<0.0001) percutaneous destructions. The technique was not correlated to DLP for all lesions.

Conclusions: Patient and tumor characteristics such as sex, age and lesion location impacted on the dose delivered during percutaneous destructions of bone, abdominal and thoracic lesions, but not the destruction technique used. Further studies are needed to propose sharper reference dose levels.

Keywords: Physics; multidetector computed tomography; percutaneous destruction; radiation exposure; radiology, interventional.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/qims-21-744). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Boxplot of total dose length product as function of patient’s age, sex, anatomical location or technique used for bone lesions percutaneous destructions. DLP, dose length product; y, years; LL, lower limb (except foot); UL, upper limb (except hand); RFA, radiofrequency ablation.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Boxplot of total dose length product as function of patient’s age, sex, anatomical location or technique used for percutaneous destructions of abdominal lesions. DLP, dose length product; y, years; MWA, microwave ablation; RFA, radiofrequency ablation.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Boxplot of total dose length product as function of patient’s age, sex, anatomical location or technique used for percutaneous destructions of thoracic lesions. DLP, dose length product; y, years; MWA, microwave ablation; RFA, radiofrequency ablation.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Helmberger T. The evolution of interventional oncology in the 21st century. Br J Radiol 2020;93:20200112. 10.1259/bjr.20200112 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Escudier B, Porta C, Schmidinger M, Rioux-Leclercq N, Bex A, Khoo V, Grünwald V, Gillessen S, Horwich A, ESMO Guidelines Committee . Electronic address: clinicalguidelines@esmo.org. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up†. Ann Oncol 2019;30:706-20. 10.1093/annonc/mdz056 - DOI - PubMed
    1. de Baère T, Aupérin A, Deschamps F, Chevallier P, Gaubert Y, Boige V, Fonck M, Escudier B, Palussiére J. Radiofrequency ablation is a valid treatment option for lung metastases: experience in 566 patients with 1037 metastases. Ann Oncol 2015;26:987-91. 10.1093/annonc/mdv037 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vogel A, Cervantes A, Chau I, Daniele B, Llovet JM, Meyer T, Nault JC, Neumann U, Ricke J, Sangro B, Schirmacher P, Verslype C, Zech CJ, Arnold D, Martinelli E, ESMO Guidelines Committee . Hepatocellular carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2018;29:iv238-55. 10.1093/annonc/mdy308 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Van Cutsem E, Cervantes A, Adam R, Sobrero A, Van Krieken JH, Aderka D, et al. ESMO consensus guidelines for the management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol 2016;27:1386-422. 10.1093/annonc/mdw235 - DOI - PubMed