UNASSIGNED: Ultrasound (US)-guided procedures can be used in the evaluation and treatment of neck masses. However, these procedures need to be practiced before being executed on humans. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a training program using a gelatin phantom to practice US-guided procedures.
UNASSIGNED: This program included a lecture and practice with a gelatin phantom. We recruited doctors from different hospitals to practice US-guided procedures, including fine-needle aspiration (FNA), core needle biopsy (CNB), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). We used a questionnaire with a 5-point scale to evaluate the effectiveness of practicing US-guided procedures under a gelatin phantom.
UNASSIGNED: Forty-four doctors participated, and 37 of them completed the questionnaires. After training, the mean (SD) scores of the doctors were 4.68 (0.47) for \"Satisfaction with this course,\" 4.54 (0.61) for \"Ease in practicing FNA&CNB using the phantom,\" 4.49 (0.61) for \"Ease in practicing PEI using the phantom,\" 4.49 (0.65) for \"Ease in practicing RFA using the phantom,\" and 4.57 (0.55) for \"The course effectively familiarizing participants with US-guided procedures.\" Participants without experience in US examination had higher scores than those with previous US experience, but the difference was not statistically significant.
UNASSIGNED: A combination of lectures and hands-on practice of US-guided procedures using a gelatin phantom is an effective educational method for doctors interested in head and neck US. After the training program, doctors gained a better understanding of the necessary steps and skills required for these procedures. They can correctly insert the instruments into the target lesion and perform different US-guided procedures.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) and lenvatinib in HCC patients with PVTT (Vp2-3), thus providing a safe and effective treatment strategy for advanced HCC patients.
UNASSIGNED: Clinical data of 227 patients with unresectable HCC and PVTT treated at the Union Hospital from January 2018 to December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into two groups according to their treatment methods: TACE+PEI+lenvatinib group (N=103) and TACE+lenvatinib group (N=124).
UNASSIGNED: The proportion of patients with disappearance, shrinkage, or no change of PVTT after treatment was significantly higher in the TACE+PEI+lenvatinib group compared to the TACE+lenvatinib group, with statistical significance (P<0.001). The TACE+PEI+lenvatinib group had higher objective response rate (ORR) (50.5% vs. 25.8%, P<0.001) and disease control rate (DCR) (87.4% vs. 74.2%, P=0.013) than the TACE+lenvatinib group. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) of the TACE+PEI+lenvatinib group was longer than that of the TACE+lenvatinib group (8.1 months vs. 6.5 months, P<0.001). Consistently, the median overall survival (mOS) of the TACE+PEI+lenvatinib group was longer than that of the TACE+lenvatinib group (17.1 months vs. 13.9 months, P<0.001).
UNASSIGNED: Among HCC patients with PVTT (Vp2-3), TACE+PEI+lenvatinib is more effective comparing to TACE+lenvatinib in prolonging PFS and OS. The control of PVTT in the TACE+PEI+lenvatinib group was significantly more satisfactory than that in the TACE+lenvatinib group. TACE+PEI+lenvatinib is a safe and effective treatment strategy for HCC patients with PVTT (Vp2-3).

UNASSIGNED: A wide range of ablative and non-surgical therapies are available for treating small hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with very early or early-stage disease and preserved liver function.
UNASSIGNED: To review and compare the effectiveness of all current ablative and non-surgical therapies for patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma (≤ 3 cm).
UNASSIGNED: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
UNASSIGNED: Nine databases (March 2021), two trial registries (April 2021) and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews.
UNASSIGNED: Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials of ablative and non-surgical therapies, versus any comparator, for small hepatocellular carcinoma. Randomised controlled trials were quality assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and mapped. The comparative effectiveness of therapies was assessed using network meta-analysis. A threshold analysis was used to identify which comparisons were sensitive to potential changes in the evidence. Where comparisons based on randomised controlled trial evidence were not robust or no randomised controlled trials were identified, a targeted systematic review of non-randomised, prospective comparative studies provided additional data for repeat network meta-analysis and threshold analysis. The feasibility of undertaking economic modelling was explored. A workshop with patients and clinicians was held to discuss the findings and identify key priorities for future research.
UNASSIGNED: Thirty-seven randomised controlled trials (with over 3700 relevant patients) were included in the review. The majority were conducted in China or Japan and most had a high risk of bias or some risk of bias concerns. The results of the network meta-analysis were uncertain for most comparisons. There was evidence that percutaneous ethanol injection is inferior to radiofrequency ablation for overall survival (hazard ratio 1.45, 95% credible interval 1.16 to 1.82), progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.36, 95% credible interval 1.11 to 1.67), overall recurrence (relative risk 1.19, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 1.39) and local recurrence (relative risk 1.80, 95% credible interval 1.19 to 2.71). Percutaneous acid injection was also inferior to radiofrequency ablation for progression-free survival (hazard ratio 1.63, 95% credible interval 1.05 to 2.51). Threshold analysis showed that further evidence could plausibly change the result for some comparisons. Fourteen eligible non-randomised studies were identified (n ≥ 2316); twelve had a high risk of bias so were not included in updated network meta-analyses. Additional non-randomised data, made available by a clinical advisor, were also included (n = 303). There remained a high level of uncertainty in treatment rankings after the network meta-analyses were updated. However, the updated analyses suggested that microwave ablation and resection are superior to percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection for some outcomes. Further research on stereotactic ablative radiotherapy was recommended at the workshop, although it is only appropriate for certain patient subgroups, limiting opportunities for adequately powered trials.
UNASSIGNED: Many studies were small and of poor quality. No comparative studies were found for some therapies.
UNASSIGNED: The existing evidence base has limitations; the uptake of specific ablative therapies in the United Kingdom appears to be based more on technological advancements and ease of use than strong evidence of clinical effectiveness. However, there is evidence that percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection are inferior to radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation and resection.
UNASSIGNED: PROSPERO CRD42020221357.
UNASSIGNED: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR131224) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 29. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of primary liver cancer. There are a range of different treatments available for patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma. We looked for clinical trials in patients with small tumours (up to 3 cm) that compared different treatments. We brought together and analysed the results of these trials to see which treatments were most effective in terms of survival, progression, side effects and quality of life. Overall, the evidence has limitations; many trials had few patients and were of poor quality. Most were from China or Japan, where the common causes of liver disease and treatments available differ from those in the United Kingdom. The results of our analyses were very uncertain so we cannot be sure which treatment is the best overall. We did find that three treatments – radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation and surgery – were generally more effective than percutaneous ethanol injection and percutaneous acid injection. There was not enough evidence to be certain which treatment was better when radiofrequency ablation was compared with laser ablation, microwave ablation, proton beam therapy or surgery. We found only poor-quality, non-randomised trials on high-intensity focused ultrasound, cryoablation and irreversible electroporation. There was very little evidence on treatments that combined radiofrequency ablation with other therapies. We found no studies that compared electrochemotherapy, histotripsy, stereotactic ablative radiotherapy or wider radiotherapy techniques with other treatments. Only two studies reported data on quality of life or patient satisfaction. We discussed the findings with patients and clinical experts. Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy was highlighted as a treatment that requires further research; however, it is only appropriate for certain subgroups of patients. Feasibility studies could inform future clinical trials by exploring issues such as whether patients are willing to take part in a trial or find the treatments acceptable.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) has been shown to be a valuable treatment for thyroid nodular pathology and metastatic cervical adenopathies.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of PEI in thyroid nodular pathology and metastatic cervical adenopathies.
METHODS: A systematic review (SR) using meta-analysis was conducted on the effectiveness and safety of PEI. A SR on cost-effectiveness was also performed. The SRs were conducted according to the methodology developed by the Cochrane Collaboration with reporting in accordance with the PRISMA statement. A cost-minimization analysis was carried out using a decision tree model. Assuming equal effectiveness between two minimally invasive techniques (PEI and radiofrequency ablation (RFA)), the model compared the costs of the alternatives with a horizon of six months and from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System.
RESULTS: The search identified three RCTs (n=157) that evaluated PEI versus RFA in patients diagnosed with benign thyroid nodules: ninety-six patients with predominantly cystic nodules and sixty-one patients with solid nodules. No evidence was found on other techniques or thyroid nodular pathology. No statistically significant differences were observed between PEI and RFA in volume reduction (%), symptom score, cosmetic score, therapeutic success and major complications. No economic evaluations were identified. The cost-minimization analysis estimated the cost per patient of the PEI procedure at €326 compared to €4781 for RFA, which means an incremental difference of -€4455.
CONCLUSIONS: There are no differences between PEI and RFA regarding their safety and effectiveness, but the economic evaluation determined that the former option is cheaper.

Non-surgical therapies are frequently used for patients with early or very early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of ablative and non-surgical therapies for patients with small HCC.
Nine databases were searched (March 2021) along with clinical trial registries. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any ablative or non-surgical therapy versus any comparator in patients with HCC ≤3 cm were eligible. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. The effectiveness of therapies was compared using NMA. Threshold analysis was undertaken to identify which NMA results had less robust evidence.
Thirty-seven eligible RCTs were included (including over 3700 patients). Most were from China (n = 17) or Japan (n = 7). Sample sizes ranged from 30 to 308 patients. The majority had a high RoB or some RoB concerns. No RCTs were identified for some therapies and no RCTs reported quality of life outcomes. The results of the NMA and treatment effectiveness rankings were very uncertain. However, the evidence demonstrated that percutaneous ethanol injection was worse than radiofrequency ablation for overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.45, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.16-1.82), progression-free survival (HR: 1.36, 95% CrI: 1.11-1.67), overall recurrence (relative risk [RR]: 1.19, 95% CrI: 1.02-1.39) and local recurrence (RR: 1.80, 95% CrI: 1.19-2.71). The threshold analysis suggested that robust evidence was lacking for some comparisons.
It is unclear which treatment is most effective for patients with small HCC because of limitations in the evidence base. It is also not known how these treatments would impact on quality of life. Further high quality RCTs are needed to provide robust evidence but may be difficult to undertake.

The most common sites of extrahepatic metastases from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are the lungs, intra-abdominal lymph nodes, bones, and adrenal glands, in that order. Although systemic therapies are a common treatment for patients with extrahepatic metastases, local ablative therapies for the extrahepatic metastatic lesions can be performed in selected patients. In this article, the literature on image-guided thermal ablation for metastasis to each organ was reviewed to summarize the current evidence. Radiofrequency ablation was the most commonly evaluated technique, and microwave ablation, cryoablation, and percutaneous ethanol injection were also utilized. The local control rate of thermal ablation therapy was relatively favorable, at approximately 70-90% in various organs. The survival outcomes varied among the studies, and several studies reported that the absence of viable intrahepatic lesions was associated with improved survival rates. Since only retrospective data from relatively small studies has been available thus far, more robust studies with prospective designs and larger cohorts are desired to prove the usefulness of thermal ablation for extrahepatic metastases from HCC.

Surgical extirpation of liver tumors remains a proven approach in the management of metastatic tumors to the liver, particularly those of colorectal origin. Ablative, non-resective therapies are an increasingly attractive primary therapy for liver tumors as they are generally better tolerated and result in far less morbidity and mortality. Ablative therapies preserve greater normal liver parenchyma allowing better post-treatment liver function and are particularly appropriate for treating subsequent liver-specific tumor recurrence. This article reviews the current status of ablative therapies for non-hepatocellular liver tumors with a discussion of many of the clinically available approaches.

OBJECTIVE: Locoregional therapies (LRT) are employed for bridging patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) awaiting orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Although the main LRT options include transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) is an alternative with considerably lower costs. This study is a pioneering evaluation of the natural history of PEI bridging to OLT as compared to TACE.
METHODS: All consecutive cirrhotic patients with HCC enlisted for OLT (2011-2020) at a single center were analyzed. Patients were divided into three LRT modality groups: PEI, TACE, and PEI+TACE. The primary study outcome was waitlist dropout due to tumor progression beyond Milan criteria. A comparison of post-transplant outcomes of patients as stratified by LRT modality also was performed.
RESULTS: One hundred twenty-nine patients were included (PEI=56, TACE=43, PEI+TACE=30). The dropout rate due to tumor progression was not different among the three groups: PEI=8.9%, TACE=14%, PEI+TACE=16.7% (p=0.54). Thirteen (76.4%) patients underwent OLT after successful downstaging (3 [75%] in the PEI group, 5 [83.3%] in the TACE group, and 5 [71.4%] in the PEI+TACE group). For the 96 patients undergoing OLT, 5-year post-transplant recurrence-free survival was PEI=55.6% vs. TACE=55.1% vs. PEI+TACE=71.4% (p=0.42). Complete/near-complete pathological response rate was similar among groups (p=0.82).
CONCLUSIONS: Dropout rates and post-transplant recurrence-free survivals related to PEI were comparable to those of TACE. This study supports the use of PEI alone or in combination with TACE for HCC patients awaiting OLT whenever RFA is not an option.

UNASSIGNED: The efficacy of the transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) process combined with percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI, TACE-P) or the radiofrequency ablation (RFA, TACE-R) process was found to be good when used for the treatment of patients suffering from early or intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma (eiHCC). The study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of the TACE-P with TACE-A processes followed during the treatment of patients with eiHCC.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 241 patients suffering from eiHCC, subjected to TACE-P (147 patients) or TACE-R (94 patients) processes from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, were retrospectively reviewed and included. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to reduce selection bias.
UNASSIGNED: The median overall survival (mOS) and progression-free survival (mPFS) of the TACE-P group were similar to those recorded for the TACE-R group (P>0.05) before using the PSM technique. Similar results were obtained post the use of the PSM technique. In the subgroup analysis after PSM, patients with single tumor (dimension: ≤5 cm), who were subjected to TACE-P-based treatment methods, exhibited worse tumor response than patients subjected to TACE-R-based methods (HR: 1.804, 95% CI: 1.083-3.005, P=0.023). Seven adverse events were reported. A statistically significant difference for all grades of adverse events (and grade III or IV adverse events) between the two groups (all P>0.05) was not reported.
UNASSIGNED: The benefits and advantages of using the TACE-P based method was similar was those obtained using the TACE-R in patients with eiHCC, especially for patients with a single large tumor or multiple tumors.