↓ Skip to main content

Hepatic Arterial Embolization Using Cone Beam CT with Tumor Feeding Vessel Detection Software: Impact on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Response

Overview of attention for article published in CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Hepatic Arterial Embolization Using Cone Beam CT with Tumor Feeding Vessel Detection Software: Impact on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Response
Published in
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00270-017-1758-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

F. H. Cornelis, A. Borgheresi, E. N. Petre, E. Santos, S. B. Solomon, K. Brown

Abstract

Dedicated tumor feeding vessel detection software (TFVDS) using cone beam CT has shown a higher sensitivity to detect tumor feeding vessels during hepatic arterial embolization (HAE) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) compared to 2D imaging. Our primary hypothesis was that HCC tumors treated with HAE guided by a TFVDS would show more complete response (CR) than when treated with 2D imaging alone. Secondary analysis of the impact on X-ray exposure was performed. Nineteen males and 8 females (median age: 69 year, 46-85) with 44 tumors (median size: 38 mm, 6-100) treated with selective HAE between January 2013 and December 2014 were included. Exclusion criteria were: extra-hepatic supply, >4 tumors, tumor size >10 cm, and adjunctive local therapy. Baseline patient and procedure characteristics were reviewed. Differences in CR per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors were assessed by univariate and multivariate analyses for tumor size, number, location, particles size, and use of TFVDS. Median imaging follow-up was 20.1 months (2-33). Use of TFVDS (13 patients, 19 tumors) was the only factor predictive of CR (OR = 3.85 [CI95%: 1.09, 13.67], p = 0.04) on univariate analysis but not on multivariate analysis (OR = 3.26 [0.87, 12.23], p = 0.08). A higher rate of CR was observed for HAE using TFVDS guidance versus 2D imaging alone (68.4%, 13-19, vs. 36%, 9-25, p = 0.03). Median dose area product was lower when TFVDS was used (149.7 Gy.cm(2), 38-365, vs. 227.8 Gy.cm(2), 85.3-468.6, p = 0.05). HCC embolized with TFVDS may result in improved local tumor response without increasing the dose exposure.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Postgraduate 4 15%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 8 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 63%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Chemistry 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2019.
All research outputs
#14,077,124
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
#1,318
of 2,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,068
of 317,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
#25
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,390 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.