{"title":"Safety and Feasibility of US-guided Microwave Ablation for the Treatment of Bethesda III Thyroid Nodules with Negative Eight-Gene Panel Mutational Profile.","authors":"Qingqing Tang, Jiawei Chen, Dengke Zhang, Qingnan Huang, Yong Chen, Xuexin Liang, Kai Zeng, Yuxian Guo, Mingliang Huang, Yanghui Wei","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240058","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240058","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To evaluate the safety and efficacy of US-guided thermal ablation in the treatment of Bethesda III thyroid nodules with negative eight-gene panel testing results. Materials and Methods This retrospective single-center study included patients with thyroid nodules diagnosed as Bethesda category III (atypia of undetermined significance) at fine-needle aspiration biopsy and with negative eight-gene testing results who were treated with US-guided microwave ablation (MWA) between July 2020 and September 2023. Incidence of complications, technical success rate (TSR), volume reduction rate (VRR), nodule recurrence, and thyroid function were evaluated over a follow-up period of 2 years. Data before and after MWA were compared using variance analysis and the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel χ<sup>2</sup> test. Results A total of 101 Bethesda III nodules were detected in 95 patients (mean ± SD age, 47.08 years ±14.63; 79 female patients, 16 male patients), all of which were completely ablated (100% TSR). Two patients experienced mild neck swelling and pressure sensation after the minimally invasive operation, and the incidence of postoperative complications was 2% (two of 95). None of the patients experienced tumor recurrence or progression. At 2-year follow-up, the mean VRR of the ablated area was 90.88% ± 13.59 in 15 patients; 87% (13 of 15) of these patients had a 100% VRR. There was no evidence of a difference in thyroid function before and after MWA from 1 to 24 months (<i>P</i> = .15-.99). Conclusion US-guided MWA was safe and effective for the treatment of Bethesda III thyroid nodules with negative eight-gene panel testing results. <b>Keywords:</b> Ablation Techniques, Radiation Therapy/Oncology, Head/Neck, Thyroid, Safety, Observer Performance Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e240058"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791661/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142819096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jennifer Holter-Chakrabarty, Lacey McNally, John Levine, James Ferrara, Sara K Vesely, Christopher G Kanakry, Tabitha Garwe, Zheng Han, Manu Pandey, Joshua Glover, Yuejin Wen, Ron Gress, Kirsten M Williams
Christian Roest, Thomas C Kwee, Igle J de Jong, Ivo G Schoots, Pim van Leeuwen, Stijn W T P J Heijmink, Henk G van der Poel, Stefan J Fransen, Anindo Saha, Henkjan Huisman, Derya Yakar
Aritrick Chatterjee, Ambereen N Yousuf, Roger Engelmann, Carla Harmath, Grace Lee, Milica Medved, Ernest B Jamison, Abel Lorente Campos, Batuhan Gundogdu, Glenn Gerber, Luke F Reynolds, Parth K Modi, Tatjana Antic, Mihai Giurcanu, Scott Eggener, Gregory S Karczmar, Aytekin Oto
Linjie Bian, Junyan Xu, Panli Li, Liyan Bai, Shaoli Song
{"title":"Comparison of <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT for Detection of Recurrent or Metastatic Paragangliomas.","authors":"Linjie Bian, Junyan Xu, Panli Li, Liyan Bai, Shaoli Song","doi":"10.1148/rycan.240059","DOIUrl":"10.1148/rycan.240059","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic performance of gallium 68 (<sup>68</sup>Ga)-DOTA-NaI3-octreotide (<sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC) and fluorine 18 (<sup>18</sup>F)-fluoro-l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (<sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA) PET/CT in detecting recurrent or metastatic paragangliomas. Materials and Methods This single-center retrospective study included patients with paragangliomas who underwent both <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT between August 2021 and December 2023. The diagnostic performance of these two tracers in detecting recurrent or metastatic tumors was compared using several metrics, including sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy. Results This study included 36 patients (median age, 52 years [range, 14-78 years]; 16 female, 20 male). Of these, nine underwent initial <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT examinations before treatment, and the remaining 27 underwent posttreatment examinations. Twenty-two of those 27 patients had recurrence or metastasis. According to lesion-level analysis, <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC had higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for diagnosis of bone metastases than did <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT (97% vs 78% [<i>P</i> < .001], 85% vs 42% [<i>P</i> = .02], and 97% vs 81% [<i>P</i> < .001], respectively). <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT had higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for the diagnosis of liver metastases than did <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT (73% vs 15% [<i>P</i> < .001], 68% vs 41% [<i>P</i> = .04], and 83% vs 46% [<i>P</i> < .001], respectively). According to patient-level analysis, the sensitivity of <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT for diagnosing liver metastases was higher than that of <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT (88% vs 25%; <i>P</i> = .04). Conclusion In patients with recurrent or metastatic paragangliomas, <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT showed better performance than <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT in detecting bone metastases, and <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA PET/CT performed better in detecting liver metastases. <b>Keywords:</b> <sup>68</sup>Ga-DOTANOC, <sup>18</sup>F-FDOPA, Pheochromocytoma, Paraganglioma Published under a CC BY 4.0 license.</p>","PeriodicalId":20786,"journal":{"name":"Radiology. Imaging cancer","volume":"7 1","pages":"e240059"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791669/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142786861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}