Skip to content
2000
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Current Medical Imaging
  4. Volume 20, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 20, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1573-4056
  • E-ISSN: 1875-6603
file format pdf download PDF
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Introduction

Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) has been popular for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, there are few reports comparing the transradial approach (TRA) and transfemoral approach (TFA) in HAIC.

Objective

This study aimed to compare the duration of the hepatic artery catheterization, fluoroscopy time (FT), radiation exposure, safety, and quality of life associated with the procedure in patients undergoing HAIC via TRA and TFA.

Methods

This prospective, single-center, randomized, controlled study included 120 patients with unresectable HCC undergoing HAIC procedures. Patients were randomly assigned to group A (n = 60, TRA-HAIC) or group B (n = 60, TFA-HAIC). The hepatic artery catheterization time, FT, entrance surface dose (ESD), dose area product (DAP), procedure-related complications, and quality of life associated with the procedure were assessed between the two groups. Independent-sample t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used to assess differences. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.

Results

HAIC procedures were successfully performed in both groups. The hepatic artery catheterization time (19.35 ± 5.84 . 18.93 ± 5.62 minutes, = 0.837), FT (2.35 ± 2.23 . 2.25 ± 2.16 minutes, = 0.901), ESD (259.32 ± 167.46 250.56 ± 170.58 mGy, = 0.449), and DAP (125.37 ± 60.65 . 120.56 ± 64.33 Gy.cm3, = 0.566) were comparable between the two groups. The incidence of artery occlusion (10.0% 0%, < 0.001) in the TRA group was significantly higher than that in the TFA group. TRA was associated with a statistically significant ( < 0.05) improvement in the quality of life.

Conclusion

TRA to HAIC was associated with greater improvement in the quality of life associated with the procedure compared with TFA. Both approaches to HAIC had similar efficiency, safety, radiation exposure, and procedure duration.

© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Bentham Science Publisher. This is an open access article published under CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840
2023-07-07
2024-11-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/cmir/20/1/CMIR-20-E110523216782.html?itemId=/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. TangA. HallouchO. ChernyakV. KamayaA. SirlinC.B. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma: Target population for surveillance and diagnosis.Abdom. Radiol.2018431132510.1007/s00261‑017‑1209‑128647765
     [Google Scholar]
  2. MiseY. SakamotoY. IshizawaT. KanekoJ. AokiT. HasegawaK. SugawaraY. KokudoN. A worldwide survey of the current daily practice in liver surgery.Liver Cancer201321556610.1159/00034622524159597
     [Google Scholar]
  3. VerslypeC RosmorducO RougierP GroupEGW Hepatocellular carcinoma: ESMO-ESDO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.Ann. Oncol.201223S7vii41vii8
     [Google Scholar]
  4. MarreroJ.A. KulikL.M. SirlinC.B. ZhuA.X. FinnR.S. AbecassisM.M. RobertsL.R. HeimbachJ.K. Diagnosis, staging, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma: 2018 practice guidance by the american association for the study of liver diseases.Hepatology201868272375010.1002/hep.2991329624699
     [Google Scholar]
  5. IkedaM. MorizaneC. UenoM. OkusakaT. IshiiH. FuruseJ. Chemotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Current status and future perspectives.Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol.201848210311410.1093/jjco/hyx18029253194
     [Google Scholar]
  6. IkedaM. MitsunagaS. OhnoI. HashimotoY. TakahashiH. WatanabeK. UmemotoK. OkusakaT. Systemic chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Past, present, and future.Diseases20153436038110.3390/diseases304036028943630
     [Google Scholar]
  7. NousoK. MiyaharaK. UchidaD. KuwakiK. IzumiN. OmataM. IchidaT. KudoM. KuY. KokudoN. SakamotoM. NakashimaO. TakayamaT. MatsuiO. MatsuyamaY. YamamotoK. Effect of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy of 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the Nationwide Survey of Primary Liver Cancer in Japan.Br. J. Cancer201310971904190710.1038/bjc.2013.54224008659
     [Google Scholar]
  8. ShiM. LuL.G. FangW.Q. GuoR.P. ChenM.S. LiY. LuoJ. XuL. ZouR.H. LinX.J. ZhangY.Q. Roles played by chemolipiodolization and embolization in chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: Single-blind, randomized trial.J. Natl. Cancer Inst.20131051596810.1093/jnci/djs46423150720
     [Google Scholar]
  9. JollyS.S. YusufS. CairnsJ. NiemeläK. XavierD. WidimskyP. BudajA. NiemeläM. ValentinV. LewisB.S. AvezumA. StegP.G. RaoS.V. GaoP. AfzalR. JoynerC.D. ChrolaviciusS. MehtaS.R. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): A randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial.Lancet201137797751409142010.1016/S0140‑6736(11)60404‑221470671
     [Google Scholar]
  10. ShiozawaS. TsuchiyaA. EndoS. KatoH. KatsubeT. KumazawaK. NaritakaY. OgawaK. Transradial approach for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison with conventional transfemoral approach.J. Clin. Gastroenterol.200337541241710.1097/00004836‑200311000‑0001314564191
     [Google Scholar]
  11. RastegarRF HouD HarrisA Is a liver biopsy necessary? investigation of a suspected hepatocellular carcinoma: A pictorial essay of hepatocellular carcinoma and the revised american association for the study of liver disease criteria.Can Assoc Radiol J.201263432934010.1016/j.carj.2011.09.004
     [Google Scholar]
  12. MasonP.J. ShahB. Tamis-HollandJ.E. BittlJ.A. CohenM.G. SafirsteinJ. DrachmanD.E. ValleJ.A. RhodesD. GilchristI.C. An update on radial artery access and best practices for transradial coronary angiography and intervention in acute coronary syndrome: A scientific statement from the american heart association.Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv.2018119e00003510.1161/HCV.000000000000003530354598
     [Google Scholar]
  13. LiQ.J. HeM.K. ChenH.W. FangW.Q. ZhouY.M. XuL. WeiW. ZhangY.J. GuoY. GuoR.P. ChenM.S. ShiM. Hepatic arterial infusion of oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus transarterial chemoembolization for large hepatocellular carcinoma: A randomized phase III trial.J. Clin. Oncol.202240215016010.1200/JCO.21.0060834648352
     [Google Scholar]
  14. KiemeneijF. LaarmanG.J. de MelkerE. Transradial artery coronary angioplasty.Am. Heart J.199512911710.1016/0002‑8703(95)90034‑97817902
     [Google Scholar]
  15. DariushniaSR RedstoneEA HeranMKS Society of interventional radiology quality improvement standards for percutaneous transcatheter embolization.J Vasc Interv Radiol.2021323476 e1e3310.1016/j.jvir.2020.10.022
     [Google Scholar]
  16. GayedA YamadaR BhatiaS Society of interventional radiology quality improvement standards on radial artery access.J Vasc Interv Radiol .2021325761 e1e2110.1016/j.jvir.2020.12.013
     [Google Scholar]
  17. AgostoniP. Biondi-ZoccaiG.G.L. De BenedictisM.L. RigattieriS. TurriM. AnselmiM. VassanelliC. ZardiniP. LouvardY. HamonM. Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures.J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.200444234935610.1016/j.jacc.2004.04.03415261930
     [Google Scholar]
  18. KisB MillsM HoffeSE Hepatic radioembolization from transradial access: Initial experience and comparison to transfemoral access.Diagn Interv Radiol.201622544444910.5152/dir.2016.15571
     [Google Scholar]
  19. ZanonC. GrossoM. ZanonE. VeltriA. AlabisoO. BazzanM. ChiappinoI. MussaA. Transaxillary access to perform hepatic artery infusion (HAI) for secondary or primitive hepatic tumors.Minerva Chir.19965197557588968147
     [Google Scholar]
  20. AraiY. TakeuchiY. InabaY. YamauraH. SatoY. AramakiT. MatsuedaK. SekiH. Percutaneous catheter placement for hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy.Tech. Vasc. Interv. Radiol.2007101303710.1053/j.tvir.2007.08.00717980316
     [Google Scholar]
  21. KudoM. UeshimaK. YokosukaO. OgasawaraS. ObiS. IzumiN. AikataH. NaganoH. HatanoE. SasakiY. HinoK. KumadaT. YamamotoK. ImaiY. IwadouS. OgawaC. OkusakaT. KanaiF. AkazawaK. YoshimuraK. JohnsonP. AraiY. KudoM. UeshimaK. YokosukaO. OgasawaraS. ObiS. IzumiN. AikataH. NaganoH. HatanoE. SasakiY. HinoK. KumadaT. YamamotoK. ImaiY. IwadouS. OgawaC. OkusakaT. KanaiF. AkazawaK. YoshimuraK. JohnsonP. AraiY. Sorafenib plus low-dose cisplatin and fluorouracil hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus sorafenib alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (SILIUS): A randomised, open label, phase 3 trial.Lancet Gastroenterol. Hepatol.20183642443210.1016/S2468‑1253(18)30078‑529631810
     [Google Scholar]
  22. ThawabiM TayalR HawatmehA CohenM WastyN Percutaneous transaxillary approach for peripheral endovascular interventions.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv.201994224324810.1002/ccd.28333
     [Google Scholar]
  23. MichaelT.T. AlomarM. PapayannisA. MogabgabO. PatelV.G. RanganB.V. LunaM. HastingsJ.L. GrodinJ. AbdullahS. BanerjeeS. BrilakisE.S. A randomized comparison of the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary artery bypass graft angiography and intervention: The RADIAL-CABG Trial (RADIAL versus Femoral Access for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Angiography and Intervention).JACC Cardiovasc. Interv.20136111138114410.1016/j.jcin.2013.08.00424139930
     [Google Scholar]
  24. SherevDA ShawRE BrentBN Angiographic predictors of femoral access site complications: Implication for planned percutaneous coronary intervention.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv200565219620210.1002/ccd.20354
     [Google Scholar]
  25. SanghviK.A. MontgomeryM. VargheseV. Effect of hemostatic device on radial artery occlusion: A randomized comparison of compression devices in the radial hemostasis study.Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med.201819893493810.1016/j.carrev.2018.08.01330243962
     [Google Scholar]
  26. GoniH. TsalafoutasI.A. TzortzisG. PappasP. BouzasN. LoulakasJ. GeorgiouA. GeorgiouE. YakoumakisE.N. Radiation doses to patients from digital subtraction angiography.Radiat. Prot. Dosimetry20051171-325125510.1093/rpd/nci75816461514
     [Google Scholar]
  27. StewartF.A. Mechanisms and dose-response relationships for radiation-induced cardiovascular disease.Ann. ICRP2012413-4727910.1016/j.icrp.2012.06.03123089006
     [Google Scholar]
  28. ScottA.M. Current issues in radiation dose monitoring and reporting.Radiol. Technol.201485550151624806053
     [Google Scholar]
  29. PaulJ. JacobiV. FarhangM. BazrafshanB. VoglT.J. MbalisikeE.C. Radiation dose and image quality of X-ray volume imaging systems: Cone-beam computed tomography, digital subtraction angiography and digital fluoroscopy.Eur. Radiol.20132361582159310.1007/s00330‑012‑2737‑223250112
     [Google Scholar]
  30. PacchioniA. VersaciF. MugnoloA. PenzoC. NikasD. SaccàS. FaveroL. AgostoniP.F. GaramiZ. PratiF. ReimersB. Risk of brain injury during diagnostic coronary angiography: Comparison between right and left radial approach.Int. J. Cardiol.201316763021302610.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.02423046593
     [Google Scholar]
  31. ShahRM PatelD AbbateA CowleyMJ JovinIS Comparison of transradial coronary procedures via right radial versus left radial artery approach: A meta-analysis.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv20168871027103310.1002/ccd.26519
     [Google Scholar]
  32. KaneiY. NakraN.C. LiouM. ValesL.L. GowdaR. RoseroH. KwanT. FoxJ.T. Randomized comparison of transradial coronary angiography via right or left radial artery approaches.Am. J. Cardiol.2011107219519710.1016/j.amjcard.2010.08.06521129711
     [Google Scholar]
  33. SciahbasiA. RigattieriS. SarandreaA. CeraM. Di RussoC. FedeleS. RomanoS. PuglieseF.R. PencoM. Operator radiation exposure during right or left transradial coronary angiography: A phantom study.Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med.201516738639010.1016/j.carrev.2015.07.00426235976
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840
Loading
A Randomized Comparison of Transradial and Transfemoral Approach in Hepatic Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy
Curr. Med. Imaging 20, e110523216782 (2024); https://doi.org/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840
/content/journals/cmir/10.2174/1573405620666230511094840
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Quality of life; Radiation exposure; Transfemoral access; Transradial access

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test