Keywords:
Interventional non-vascular, Computer applications, CT, Percutaneous, Image manipulation / Reconstruction, Ablation procedures, Biopsy, Technology assessment
Authors:
P. Durand, A. Moreau-Gaudry, J. frandon, M. Medici, E. Chipon, C. SENGEL, I. BRICAULT; Grenoble/FR
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2013/B-0429
Results
N=120 patients enrolled between June 2010 and January 2012. Nineteen different operators (11 seniors,
8 residents) participated in the study.
Interventions were both scheduled and emergency procedures,
and included drainages,
biopsies,
tumor ablations (radiofrequency,
microwave and cryotherapy),
sympathicolyses and infiltrations (baseline - Table 1,
Patient Flow - Fig.
5).
Main outcome results (ITT) :
|
CT-group |
NAV-group |
p-value |
Analyzed population |
n=60 |
n=60 |
|
Distance(mm) |
8.9 [4.9; 15.1] |
4.1 [2.7; 9.1] |
<0.001 |
Angle(°) |
7.9 [5.9; 13.2] |
4.7 [2.4; 8.2] |
<0.001 |
Operator satisfaction after intervention (PP) :
|
CT-group |
NAV-group |
p-value |
Analyzed
population |
n=58 |
n=55 |
|
Global satisfaction
(0-10) |
8[7; 9] |
9[8; 9.5] |
0.025 |
Intervention duration and number of series (PP) :
|
CT-group |
NAV-group |
p-value |
From planning to first needle |
Duration (min) |
16 [14.25; 20] |
22 [17; 26] |
0.001 |
Number of CT control acquisitions |
1 [1; 1] |
1 [1; 2] |
0.077 |
Progression to target |
Duration (min) |
7 [6; 12.75] |
8 [6; 12] |
0.797 |
Number of CT control acquisitions |
3 [2; 4] |
2 [2; 3] |
0.01 |
No difference between the groups was highlighted for delivered radiation dose during the different phases of the procedures.
The success of interventions was comparable for both groups CT=57/58 NAV=53/55.
Adverse events were comparable for both groups CT=1/58 NAV=3/58.
Illustration images for CT (Fig.
5) and for NAV (Fig.
6).