Focal Salvage MR Imaging–Guided Cryoablation for Localized Prostate Cancer Recurrence after Radiotherapy:12-Month Follow-up

Purpose: To evaluate safety, quality of life (QoL), and local cancer control after focal salvage MR imaging–guided cryoablation in patients with local recurrence of prostate cancer (PCa) after radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: A retrospective, single-center study was performed in 62 patients with radiorecurrent PCa who underwent MR imaging–guided cryoablation since May 2011 with a follow-up ≥12 months in December 2017. Rates and descriptions of adverse events were reported. Ablation complications were classified according to the Clavien and SIR systems. Validated questionnaires were used to observe functional outcomes and QoL before therapy and 6 and 12 months after therapy. Cancer control was defined as no biochemical failure according to Phoenix criteria and no other clinical evidence for local or metastatic disease. Results: All procedures were technically feasible. The number of complications requiring major therapy (Clavien grade 3b/4 or SIR grade D/E/F) was low (2 [3.2%] and 1 [1.6%], respectively). After 12 months, the International Consultation of Incontinence Questionnaire–Short Form (P < .001) and 5-item International Index of Erectile Function (P = .001) scores became significantly worse, indicating increased symptoms of incontinence and diminished erectile function, without compromising QoL. Six patients developed metastases within 6 months. After 12 months, 36 patients (63%) were disease-free. Conclusions: Focal salvage MR imaging–guided cryoablation is safe and is associated with a high technical success rate, preservation of QoL, and local PCa control. This treatment can be a reasonable alternative to salvage radical prostatectomy in properly selected patients with low morbidity and preservation of QoL; however, longer follow-up is needed

Validation of a Web-Based Planning Tool for Percutaneous Cryoablation of Renal Tumors

Purpose: To validate a simulation environment for virtual planning of percutaneous cryoablation of renal tumors. Materials and Methods: Prospectively collected data from 19 MR-guided procedures were used for validation of the simulation model. Volumetric overlap of the simulated ablation zone volume (Σ) and the segmented ablation zone volume (S; assessed on 1-month follow-up scan) was quantified. Validation metrics were DICE Similarity Coefficient (DSC; the ratio between twice the overlapping volume of both ablation zones divided by the sum of both ablation zone volumes), target overlap (the ratio between the overlapping volume of both ablation zones to the volume of S; low ratio means S is underestimated), and positive predictive value (the ratio between the overlapping volume of both ablation zones to the volume of Σ; low ratio means S is overestimated). Values were between 0 (no alignment) and 1 (perfect alignment), a value > 0.7 is considered good. Results: Mean volumes of S and Σ were 14.8 cm3 (± 9.9) and 26.7 cm3 (± 15.0), respectively. Mean DSC value was 0.63 (± 0.2), and ≥ 0.7 in 9 cases (47%). Mean target overlap and positive predictive value were 0.88 (± 0.11) and 0.53 (± 0.24), respectively. In 17 cases (89%), target overlap was ≥ 0.7; positive predictive value was ≥ 0.7 in 4 cases (21%) and < 0.6 in 13 cases (68%). This indicates S is overestimated in the majority of cases. Conclusion: The validation results showed a tendency of the simulation model to overestimate the ablation effect. Model adjustments are necessary to make it suitable for clinical use.Peer reviewe

Focal laser ablation as clinical treatment of prostate cancer: Report from a Delphi consensus project

Purpose: To define the role of focal laser ablation (FLA) as clinical treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) using the Delphi consensus method. Methods: A panel of international experts in the field of focal therapy (FT) in PCa conducted a collaborative consensus project using the Delphi method. Experts were invited to online questionnaires focusing on patient selection and treatment of PCa with FLA during four subsequent rounds. After each round, outcomes were displayed, and questionnaires were modified based on the comments provided by panelists. Results were finalized and discussed during face-to-face meetings. Results: Thirty-seven experts agreed to participate, and consensus was achieved on 39/43 topics. Clinically significant PCa (csPCa) was defined as any volume Grade Group 2 [Gleason score (GS) 3+4]. Focal therapy was specified as treatment of all csPCa and can be considered primary treatment as an alternative to radical treatment in carefully selected patients. In patients with intermediate-risk PCa (GS 3+4) as well as patients with MRI-visible and biopsy-confirmed local recurrence, FLA is optimal for targeted ablation of a specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible focus. However, FLA should not be applied to candidates for active surveillance and close follow-up is required. Suitability for FLA is based on tumor volume, location to vital structures, GS, MRI-visibility, and biopsy confirmation. Conclusion: Focal laser ablation is a promising technique for treatment of clinically localized PCa and should ideally be performed within approved clinical trials. So far, only few studies have reported on FLA and further validation with longer follow-up is mandatory before widespread clinical implementation is justified

Safety and efficacy of aspirin, unfractionated heparin, both, or neither during endovascular stroke treatment (MR CLEAN-MED):an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background: Aspirin and unfractionated heparin are often used during endovascular stroke treatment to improve reperfusion and outcomes. However, the effects and risks of anti-thrombotics for this indication are unknown. We therefore aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of intravenous aspirin, unfractionated heparin, both, or neither started during endovascular treatment in patients with ischaemic stroke. Methods: We did an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with a 2 × 3 factorial design in 15 centres in the Netherlands. We enrolled adult patients (ie, ≥18 years) with ischaemic stroke due to an intracranial large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation in whom endovascular treatment could be initiated within 6 h of symptom onset. Eligible patients had a score of 2 or more on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, and a CT or MRI ruling out intracranial haemorrhage. Randomisation was done using a web-based procedure with permuted blocks and stratified by centre. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either periprocedural intravenous aspirin (300 mg bolus) or no aspirin, and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive moderate-dose unfractionated heparin (5000 IU bolus followed by 1250 IU/h for 6 h), low-dose unfractionated heparin (5000 IU bolus followed by 500 IU/h for 6 h), or no unfractionated heparin. The primary outcome was the score on the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days. Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was the main safety outcome. Analyses were based on intention to treat, and treatment effects were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) or common ORs, with adjustment for baseline prognostic factors. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number, ISRCTN76741621. Findings: Between Jan 22, 2018, and Jan 27, 2021, we randomly assigned 663 patients; of whom, 628 (95%) provided deferred consent or died before consent could be asked and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. On Feb 4, 2021, after unblinding and analysis of the data, the trial steering committee permanently stopped patient recruitment and the trial was stopped for safety concerns. The risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage was higher in patients allocated to receive aspirin than in those not receiving aspirin (43 [14%] of 310 vs 23 [7%] of 318; adjusted OR 1·95 [95% CI 1·13–3·35]) as well as in patients allocated to receive unfractionated heparin than in those not receiving unfractionated heparin (44 [13%] of 332 vs 22 [7%] of 296; 1·98 [1·14–3·46]). Both aspirin (adjusted common OR 0·91 [95% CI 0·69–1·21]) and unfractionated heparin (0·81 [0·61–1·08]) led to a non-significant shift towards worse modified Rankin Scale scores. Interpretation: Periprocedural intravenous aspirin and unfractionated heparin during endovascular stroke treatment are both associated with an increased risk of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage without evidence for a beneficial effect on functional outcome. Funding: The Collaboration for New Treatments of Acute Stroke consortium, the Brain Foundation Netherlands, the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Stryker, Medtronic, Cerenovus, and the Dutch Heart Foundation

Extracranial carotid disease and effect of intra-arterial treatment in patients with proximal anterior circulation stroke in MR CLEAN

Background: The presence of extracranial carotid disease (ECD) is associated with less favorable clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke caused by intracranial proximal occlusion. Acute intra-arterial treatment (IAT) in the setting of extracranial and intracranial lesions is considered challenging, and whether it yields improved outcomes remains uncertain. Objective: To examine whether the presence of ECD modified the effect of IAT for intracranial proximal anterior circulation occlusion. Design: Prespecified subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in the Netherlands. (Trial registrations: NTR1804 [Netherlands Trial Register] and ISRCTN10888758) Setting: 16 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients: Acute ischemic stroke caused by proximal intracranial arterial occlusion of the anterior circulation. Extracranial carotid disease was defined as cervical internal carotid artery stenosis (>50%) or occlusion. Intervention: IAT treatment versus no IAT. Measurements: The primary outcome was functional outcome, as measured by the modified Rankin Scale at 90 days and reported as adjusted common odds ratio (acOR) for a shift in direction of a better outcome. Multivariable ordinal logistic regression analysis with an interaction term was used to estimate treatment effect modification by ECD. Results: The overall acOR was 1.67 (95% CI, 1.21 to 2.30) in favor of the intervention. The acOR was 3.1 (CI, 1.7 to 5.8) in the prespecified subgroup of patients with ECD versus 1.3 (CI, 0.9 to 1.9) in patients presenting without ECD. Both acORs are in favor of the intervention (P for interaction = 0.07). Limitation: The study was not powered for subgroup analysis. Conclusion: Intra-arterial treatment may be at least as effective in patients with ECD as in those without ECD, and it should not be withheld in these complex patients with acute ischemic stroke

Improvements in Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke:A Longitudinal Study in the MR CLEAN Registry

BACKGROUND: We evaluated data from all patients in the Netherlands who underwent endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in the past 3.5 years, to identify nationwide trends in time to treatment and procedural success, and assess their effect on clinical outcomes. METHODS: We included patients with proximal occlusions of the anterior circulation from the second and first cohorts of the MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands) Registry (March 2014 to June 2016; June 2016 to November 2017, respectively). We compared workflow times and rates of successful reperfusion (defined as an extended thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score of 2B-3) between cohorts and chronological quartiles (all included patients stratified in chronological quartiles of intervention dates to create equally sized groups over the study period). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression was used to assess differences in the primary outcome (ordinal modified Rankin Scale at 90 days). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (second cohort n=1692, first cohort n=1488) except for higher age, poorer collaterals, and less signs of early ischemia on computed tomography in the second cohort. Time from stroke onset to groin puncture and reperfusion were shorter in the second cohort (median 185 versus 210 minutes; P<0.001 and 236 versus 270 minutes; P<0.001, respectively). Successful reperfusion was achieved more often in the second than in the first cohort (72% versus 66%; P<0.001). Functional outcome significantly improved (adjusted common odds ratio 1.23 [95% CI, 1.07-1.40]). This effect was attenuated by adjustment for time from onset to reperfusion (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.98-1.28]) and successful reperfusion (adjusted common odds ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.99-1.30]). Outcomes were consistent in the analysis per chronological quartile. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes after endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in routine clinical practice have improved over the past years, likely resulting from improved workflow times and higher successful reperfusion rates

Estimation of treatment effects in observational stroke care data: comparison of statistical approaches

Introduction: Various statistical approaches can be used to deal with unmeasured confounding when estimating treatment effects in observational studies, each with its own pros and cons. This study aimed to compare treatment effects as estimated by different statistical approaches for two interventions in observational stroke care data. Patients and methods: We used prospectively collected data from the MR CLEAN registry including all patients (n = 3279) with ischemic stroke who underwent endovascular treatment (EVT) from 2014 to 2017 in 17 Dutch hospitals. Treatment effects of two interventions – i.e., receiving an intravenous thrombolytic (IVT) and undergoing general anesthesia (GA) before EVT – on good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale ≤2) were estimated. We used three statistical regression-based approaches that vary in assumptions regarding the source of unmeasured confounding: individual-level (two subtypes), ecological, and instrumental variable analyses. In the latter, the preference for using the interventions in each hospital was used as an instrument. Results: Use of IVT (range 66–87%) and GA (range 0–93%) varied substantially between hospitals. For IVT, the individual-level (OR ~ 1.33) resulted in significant positive effect estimates whereas in instrumental variable analysis no significant treatment effect was found (OR 1.11; 95% CI 0.58–1.56). The ecological analysis indicated no statistically significant different likelihood (β = − 0.002%; P = 0.99) of good functional outcome at hospitals using IVT 1% more frequently. For GA, we found non-significant opposite directions of points estimates the treatment effect in the individual-level (ORs ~ 0.60) versus the instrumental variable approach (OR = 1.04). The ecological analysis also resulted in a non-significant negative association (0.03% lower probability). Discussion and conclusion: Both magnitude and direction of the estimated treatment effects for both interventions depend strongly on the statistical approach and thus on the source of (unmeasured) confounding. These issues should be understood concerning the specific characteristics of data, before applying an approach and interpreting the results. Instrumental variable analysis might be considered when unobserved confounding and practice variation is expected in observational multicenter studies