Repeatability, and Intra-Observer and Interobserver Agreement of Two Dimensional Perfusion Angiography in Patients with Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia

Objective. Two dimensional (2D) perfusion angiography is a method that provides quantitative foot perfusion information from standard digital subtraction angiography acquisitions. The aim of this study was to test the reliability of this method in patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI) by investigating repeatability, and intra-observer and interobserver agreement. Methods: Twenty patients with CLTI and a below the knee endovascular revascularisation were included in a prospective clinical study. Prior to treatment two perfusion angiography runs were acquired with a five minute interval without performing an intervention. In these recordings, regions of interest were selected and time density curves and perfusion parameters were determined. To investigate intra-observer agreement one observer performed five measurements on the same acquisition for each patient. To investigate interobserver agreement three observers performed measurements on the same acquisition for each patient. Results were presented in Bland-Altman plots and as the intraclass correlation coefficient per parameter. Results: Two patients were excluded from repeatability analyses because of major motion artefacts. Repeatability analyses of the 18 remaining patients showed excellent correlation for every parameter (> .96). Intra-observer and interobserver agreement for all 20 patients were excellent for all parameters (1.00). Conclusion: Repeatability and intra-observer and interobserver agreement of 2D perfusion angiography in patients with CLTI were found to be excellent. It is therefore a reliable tool when used according to the standardised methods described in this study

Resectability and Ablatability Criteria for the Treatment of Liver Only Colorectal Metastases:Multidisciplinary Consensus Document from the COLLISION Trial Group

The guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer crudely state that the best local treatment should be selected from a 'toolbox' of techniques according to patient- and treatment-related factors. We created an interdisciplinary, consensus-based algorithm with specific resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). To pursue consensus, members of the multidisciplinary COLLISION and COLDFIRE trial expert panel employed the RAND appropriateness method (RAM). Statements regarding patient, disease, tumor and treatment characteristics were categorized as appropriate, equipoise or inappropriate. Patients with ECOG≤2, ASA≤3 and Charlson comorbidity index ≤8 should be considered fit for curative-intent local therapy. When easily resectable and/or ablatable (stage IVa), (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy is not indicated. When requiring major hepatectomy (stage IVb), neo-adjuvant systemic therapy is appropriate for early metachronous disease and to reduce procedural risk. To downstage patients (stage IVc), downsizing induction systemic therapy and/or future remnant augmentation is advised. Disease can only be deemed permanently unsuitable for local therapy if downstaging failed (stage IVd). Liver resection remains the gold standard. Thermal ablation is reserved for unresectable CRLM, deep-seated resectable CRLM and can be considered when patients are in poor health. Irreversible electroporation and stereotactic body radiotherapy can be considered for unresectable perihilar and perivascular CRLM 0-5cm. This consensus document provides per-patient and per-tumor resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of CRLM. These criteria are intended to aid tumor board discussions, improve consistency when designing prospective trials and advance intersociety communications. Areas where consensus is lacking warrant future comparative studies.</p