Registration of three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound fusion imaging (3DCEUS-FI) is time-consuming to obtain high success rate.
OBJECTIVE:
To investigate the influence factors on registration success rate of 3DCEUS-FI.
METHODS:
Water tank phantoms were made to obtain mimicked pre- and post- radiofrequency ablation three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound (3DCEUS) and CT images. Orthogonal trials were designed according to factors including size, depth, enhancement level of mimicked tumor, diameter and number of mimicked adjacent vessels. Mimicked pre- and post-RFA 3DCEUS images of 72 trials were fused to assess ablative margin (AM) by two radiologists. With CT images as standard, 3DCEUS-FI accuracy was considered as the consistency of AM evaluation. The inter-observer agreement and the influence factors on registration success rates were analyzed.
RESULTS:
The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for the consistency of AM evaluation between CT and 3DCEUS-FI in x-axis, y-axis or z-axis was 0.840∼0.948 (P < 0.001). The ICC for inter-observer agreement was 0.840∼0.948 (P < 0.001). The success rates of registration within mimicked vessels with diameter of 2 mm were significantly lower than those with diameter of 3 mm and 4 mm.
CONCLUSIONS:
The mimicked AM measured by 3DCEUS-FI had high accuracy and inter-observer agreement. Diameter of the mimicked adjacent vessels was significantly related to success rate of registration.
HeimbachJK, KulikLM, FinnRS, SirlinCB, AbecassisMM, RobertsLR, et al. AASLD guidelines for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology (Baltimore, Md). 2018;67(1):358–80. doi:10.1002/hep.29086.
3.
KeiSK, RhimH, ChoiD, LeeWJ, LimHK, KimYSLocal tumor progression after radiofrequency ablation of liver tumors: analysis of morphologic pattern and site of recurrence. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(6):1544–51. doi: 10.2214/ajr.07.2798.
4.
YuJ, LiangP, YuXL, ChengZG, HanZY, MuMJ, et al. Local tumour progression after ultrasound-guided microwave ablation of liver malignancies: risk factors analysis of 2529 tumours. European Radiology. 2015;25(4):1119–26. doi:10.1007/s00330-014-3483-4.
5.
BerberE, SipersteinALocal recurrence after laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation of liver tumors: an analysis of 1032 tumors. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(10):2757–64. doi:10.1245/s10434-008-0043-7.
6.
KimYS, LeeWJ, RhimH, LimHK, ChoiD, LeeJYThe 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. Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(3):758–65. doi:10.2214/ajr.09.2954.
7.
NakazawaT, KokubuS, ShibuyaA, OnoK, WatanabeM, HidakaH, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: correlation between local tumor progression after ablation and ablative margin. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(2):480–8. doi:10.2214/ajr.05.2079.
8.
LaiZC, LiangJY, ChenLD, WangZ, RuanSM, XieXY, et al. Do hepatocellular carcinomas located in subcapsular space or in proximity to vessels increase the rate of local tumor progression? A Meta-Analysis. Life Sciences. 2018;207:381–5. doi:10.1016/j.lfs.2018.06.016.
9.
LiuCH, ArellanoRS, UppotRN, SamirAE, GervaisDA, MuellerPRRadiofrequency ablation of hepatic tumours: effect of post-ablation margin on local tumour progression. European Radiology. 2010;20(4):877–85. doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1610-4.
10.
FujiokaC, HoriguchiJ, IshifuroM, KakizawaH, KiguchiM, MatsuuraN, et al. A feasibility study: evaluation of radiofrequency ablation therapy to hepatocellular carcinoma using image registration of preoperative and postoperative CT. Acad Radiol. 2006;13(8):986–94.
11.
ToshikuniN, TsutsumiM, TakumaY, ArisawaTReal-time image fusion for successful percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(11):2005–10. doi:10.7863/ultra.33.11.2005.
12.
ZitovaB, FlusserJImage registration methods: a survey. Image Vis Comput. 2003;21(11):977–1000. doi:10.1016/s0262-8856(03)00137-9.
13.
SakakibaraM, OhkawaK, KatayamaK, ImanakaK, IshiharaA, HasegawaN, et al. Three-dimensional registration of images obtained before and after radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma to assess treatment adequacy. Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(5):W487–95. doi10.2214/AJR.13.11384.
14.
ShinS, LeeJM, KimKW, JooI, HanJK, ChoiBI, et al.
Postablation assessment using follow-up registration of CT images before and after radiofrequency ablation (RFA): prospective evaluation of midterm therapeutic results of RFA for hepatocellular carcinoma. Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203(1):70–7. doi:10.2214/ajr.13.11709.
15.
MakinoY, ImaiY, IguraT, HoriM, FukudaK, SawaiY, et al. Comparative evaluation of three-dimensional Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MR fusion imaging with CT fusion imaging in the assessment of treatment effect of radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Imaging. 2015;40(1):102–11. doi:10.1007/s00261-014-0201-2.
16.
JiangC, LiuB, ChenS, PengZ, XieX, KuangMSafety margin after radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: precise assessment with a three-dimensional reconstruction technique using CT Imaging. Int J Hyperthermia. 2018;34(8):1135–41. doi:10.1080/02656736.2017.1411981.
17.
XuanM, ZhouF, DingY, ZhuQ, DongJ, ZhouH, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in assessing the therapeutic response to radio frequency ablation for liver tumors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(4):2067–75. doi:10.1007/s00464-017-5903-4.
18.
YangY, ShiXQ, ChenG, ZhouXN, QianLXContrast-enhanced ultrasound for evaluating response to pulsed-wave high-intensity focused ultrasound therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2022;81(1):57–67. doi:10.3233/CH-211342.
19.
JungEM, EngelM, WiggermannP, SchichoA, LerchbaumerM, StroszczynskiC, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with parametric imaging after irreversible electroporation (IRE) of the prostate to assess the success of prostate cancer treatment. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2021;77(3):303–10. doi:10.3233/CH-201000.
20.
GeyerB, PochF, GemeinhardtO, NeizertCA, NiehuesSM, VahldiekJL, et al. Microwave ablation zones are larger than they macroscopically appear - Reevaluation based on NADH vitality staining ex vivo. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2019;73(2):371–8. doi:10.3233/CH-190583.
21.
CaoJ, DongY, MaoF, WangWDynamic Three-Dimensional Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound to Predict Therapeutic Response of Radiofrequency Ablation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Preliminary Findings. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:6469703. doi:10.1155/2018/6469703.
22.
LuY, LiuB, ZhengY, LuoJ, ZhangX, HuangG, et al. Application of real-time three-dimensional contrast-enhanced ultrasound using SonoVue for the evaluation of focal liver lesions: a prospective single-center study. Am J Transl Res. 2018;10(5) :1469–80.
23.
ZhangX, HuangG, YeJ, XuM, CongL, HeX, et al. 3-D Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Fusion Imaging: A New Technique to Evaluate the Ablative Margin of Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019;45(8):1933–43. doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2019.03.019.
24.
ShiehGA comparison of two indices for the intraclass correlation coefficient. Behav Res Methods. 2012;44(4):1212–23. doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0188-y.
25.
GiraudeauB, GomezMA, DefontaineMAssessing the reproducibility of quantitative ultrasound parameters with standardized coefficient of variation or intraclass correlation coefficient: a unique approach. Behav Res Methods. 2003;14(7):614–5. doi:10.1007/s00198-002-1334-7.
26.
HeinzeG, SchemperMA solution to the problem of separation in logistic regression. Stat Med. 2002;21(16):2409–19. doi:10.1002/sim.1047.
27.
HeinzeGA comparative investigation of methods for logistic regression with separated or nearly separated data. Stat Med. 2006;25(24):4216–26. doi:10.1002/sim.2687.
28.
SatapathySC, NaikA, ParvathiKA teaching learning based optimization based on orthogonal design for solving global optimization problems. Springerplus. 2013;2(1):130. doi:10.1186/2193-1801-2-130.
29.
LiK, SuZ, XuE, JuJ, MengX, ZhengRImprovement of ablative margins by the intraoperative use of CEUS-CT/MR image fusion in hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:277. doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2306-1.
