Radiation dose reduction in CT-guided cryoablation of renal tumors

PURPOSEWe aimed to evaluate the effect on the radiation dose to the patient by reducing the tube current during the placement of the ablation needles (reduced dose group) compared with the patient doses delivered when scanning at the standard fully diagnostic level (full dose group) in computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous cryoablation.METHODSWe conducted a retrospective study of 103 patients undergoing cryoablation in a tertiary cancer center. Overall, 62 patients were scanned with standard exposure parameters (full dose group) set on a 64-slice multidetector CT scanner, while 41 patients were scanned on a reduced dose protocol. Dose levels were retrieved from the hospital picture and archiving communication system including the volumetric CT dose index (CTDIvol), total dose length product (DLP), length of cryoablation procedure, number of cryoablation needles and patient size. Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney (rank-sum) tests were used to compare the median DLP, CTDIvol and skin dose between the two groups.RESULTSMedian total DLP for the full dose group was 6025 mGy·cm (1909–13353 mGy·cm) compared with 3391 mGy·cm (1683–6820 mGy·cm) for the reduced dose group. The reduced dose group had a 44% reduction in total DLP and 42% reduction in total CTDIvol (p < 0.001). The estimated skin doses were 384 mGy for the full dose group and 224 mGy for the reduced dose group (42% reduction) (p < 0.001). At 12-month follow-up, the technical success for the full dose (n=62) was 97% with 2 patients requiring a further cryoablation treatment for residual tumor. The technical success for the reduced dose group (n=41) was 100%.CONCLUSIONCT dose reduction technique during image-guided cryoablation treatment of renal tumors can achieve significant radiation dose reduction whilst maintaining sufficient image quality.

Renal cell carcinoma is the most common kidney cancer and has a rising incidence (1–4), with obesity and smoking being major risk factors (5–8).Image-guided ablation offers a more minimally invasive option compared with surgery and the current evidence base shows that it is a safe and effective treatment for T1a tumors, with a low rate of complications (9–11). The major advantage of cryoablation over other modalities is the ability to accurately visualize the iceball and therefore zone of ablation on intraprocedural imaging, either with computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (12, 13). However, renal cryoablation involves the placement of more ablation probes and can have almost three times the radiation exposure compared with CT-guided radiofrequency ablation procedures (14).In addition to this substantial radiation dose per cryoablation, estimated to be between 32 and 39.7 mSv, the follow-up CT imaging will also add to the total radiation burden (15, 16). Whilst this level of radiation dose and associated stochastic risk may be a lesser concern in the older patients, greater consideration needs to be given to younger patients (<50 years old) and in patients requiring lifelong follow-up imaging, in particular those with hereditary diseases such as Von Hippel-Lindau syndrome (15). To our knowledge, the potential for reducing radiation dose for cryoablation patients.The principle aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on the radiation dose to the patient by reducing the tube current during the placement of the ablation needles (reduced dose group) compared with the patient doses delivered when scanning at the standard fully diagnostic level (full dose group) in CT-guided percutaneous cryoablation.