Explore the vast range of titles available.

Recently, genicular nerve block and radiofrequency ablation were introduced to alleviate knee pain in patients with chronic knee osteoarthritis. Both ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided genicular nerve blocks have been used. However, whether one is superior to the other remains unknown. The present study compares the efficacy of ultrasound- vs fluoroscopy-guided genicular nerve blocks. This research used a prospective randomized comparison design. The study took place at a single pain clinic within a tertiary medical center in Seoul, Republic of Korea. From July 2015 to September 2017, a randomized controlled study was performed to analyze the difference in the efficacy of ultrasound- vs fluoroscopy-guided genicular nerve blocks. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Global Perceived Effect Scales (GPES), and complications were evaluated pre-procedure, and 1 and 3 months after genicular nerve block. A total of 80 patients were enrolled and randomly distributed to groups U (ultrasound-guided, n = 40) and F (fluoroscopy-guided, n = 40). Those who were lost to follow-up or had undergone other interventions were excluded, resulting in 31 and 30 patients in groups U and F, respectively. No differences in NRS-11 or WOMAC were observed between the 2 groups at baseline or during the follow-up period. GPES and complication rates were also similar between both groups. We were unable to perform double-blind randomization and did not evaluate patients' baseline emotional states. Pain relief, functional improvement, and safety were similar between groups receiving ultrasound- and fluoroscopy-guided genicular nerve blocks. Therefore, either of the 2 imaging devices may be utilized during a genicular nerve block for chronic knee pain relief. However, considering radiation exposure, ultrasound guidance may be superior to fluoroscopic guidance.The study protocol was approved by our institutional review board (2015-0369), and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. The trial was registered with the Clinical Research Information Service (KCT 0002846). This work was presented in part as D-H Kim's MS thesis at the University of Ulsan College of Medicine (2018). Genicular nerve block, ultrasound, fluoroscopy, knee osteoarthritis, Numeric Rating Scale, The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.

ObjectivesTo compare sequential fluoroscopy guidance with spiral guidance in terms of safety, effectiveness, speed and radiation in interventional whole body procedures.MethodsThis study was a retrospective analysis of data from the prospective, randomised controlled, multicentre CTNAV2 study. The present analysis included 385 patients: 247 in the sequential group (SEQ) and 138 in the spiral group (SPI). Safety was assessed by the number of major complications. Effectiveness was measured according to the number of targets reached. Data on procedural time and radiation delivered to patients were also collected.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups (SEQ vs SPI) regarding the success rate (99.6% vs 99.3%, p = 0.680), procedural time (7 min 40 s ± 5 min 48 s vs 7 min 13 s ± 7 min 33 s, p = 0.507), or major complications (2.43% vs 5.8%, p = 0.101). Radiation dose to patients was 84% lower in the sequential group (54.8 ± 51.8 mGy cm vs 352.6 ± 404 mGy cm, p < 0.0001).ConclusionsSequential CT fluoroscopy-guided whole-body interventional procedures seems to be as safe, effective and fast as spiral guidance, while also yielding a significant decrease in the radiation dose to patients.Key Points• Sequential CT fluoroscopy and spiral acquisition are comparable in terms of safety, effectiveness and speed.• Procedural times are comparable despite an increased number of acquisitions in sequential fluoroscopy.• Radiation dose to patients is 84% lower in sequential fluoroscopy compared with spiral CT.

Objective Evaluate the performance of a robotic system for CT-guided lung biopsy in comparison to the conventional manual technique. Materials and methods One hundred patients referred for CT-guided lung biopsy were randomly assigned to group A (robot-assisted procedure) or group B (conventional procedure). Size, distance from entry point and position in lung of target lesions were evaluated to assess homogeneity differences between the two groups. Procedure duration, dose length product (DLP), precision of needle positioning, diagnostic performance of the biopsy and rate of complications were evaluated to assess the clinical performance of the robotic system as compared to the conventional technique. Results All biopsies were successfully performed. The size ( p  = 0.41), distance from entry point ( p  = 0.86) and position in lung ( p  = 0.32) of target lesions were similar in both groups ( p  = 0.05). Procedure duration and radiation dose were significantly reduced in group A as compared to group B ( p  = 0.001). Precision of needle positioning, diagnostic performance of the biopsy and rate of complications were similar in both groups ( p  = 0.05). Conclusion Robot-assisted CT-guided lung biopsy can be performed safely and with high diagnostic accuracy, reducing procedure duration and radiation dose in comparison to the conventional manual technique. Key Points • CT-guided biopsy is the main procedure to obtain diagnosis in lung tumours . • The robotic device facilitates percutaneous needle placement under CT guidance . • Robot-assisted CT-guided lung biopsy reduces procedure duration and radiation dose .

Purpose Radiation safety and protection are a key component of fluoroscopy-guided interventions. We hypothesize that providing weekly personal dose feedback will increase radiation awareness and ultimately will lead to optimized behavior. Therefore, we designed and implemented a personalized feedback of procedure and personal doses for medical staff involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions. Materials and Methods Medical staff (physicians and technicians, n  = 27) involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions were equipped with electronic personal dose meters (PDMs). Procedure dose data including the dose area product and effective doses from PDMs were prospectively monitored for each consecutive procedure over an 8-month period ( n  = 1082). A personalized feedback form was designed displaying for each staff individually the personal dose per procedure, as well as relative and cumulative doses. This study consisted of two phases: (1) 1–5th months: Staff did not receive feedback ( n  = 701) and (2) 6–8th months: Staff received weekly individual dose feedback ( n  = 381). An anonymous evaluation was performed on the feedback and occupational dose. Results Personalized feedback was scored valuable by 76% of the staff and increased radiation dose awareness for 71%. 57 and 52% reported an increased feeling of occupational safety and changing their behavior because of personalized feedback, respectively. For technicians, the normalized dose was significantly lower in the feedback phase compared to the prefeedback phase: [median (IQR) normalized dose (phase 1) 0.12 (0.04–0.50) µSv/Gy cm 2 versus (phase 2) 0.08 (0.02–0.24) µSv/Gy cm 2 , p  = 0.002]. Conclusion Personalized dose feedback increases radiation awareness and safety and can be provided to staff involved in fluoroscopy-guided interventions.

Background Restoration of biomechanics is a major goal in THA. Imageless navigation enables intraoperative control of leg length equalization and offset reconstruction. However, the effect of navigation compared with intraoperative fluoroscopy is unclear. Questions/purposes We asked whether intraoperative use of imageless navigation (1) improves the relative accuracy of leg length and global and femoral offset restoration; (2) increases the absolute precision of leg length and global and femoral offset equalization; and (3) reduces outliers in a reconstruction zone of ± 5 mm for leg length and global and femoral offset restoration compared with intraoperative fluoroscopy during minimally invasive (MIS) THA with the patient in a lateral decubitus position. Methods In this prospective study a consecutive series of 125 patients were randomized to either navigation-guided or fluoroscopy-controlled THA using sealed, opaque envelopes. All patients received the same cementless prosthetic components through an anterolateral MIS approach while they were in a lateral decubitus position. Leg length, global or total offset (representing the combination of femoral and acetabular offset), and femoral offset differences were restored using either navigation or fluoroscopy. Postoperatively, residual leg length and global and femoral offset discrepancies were analyzed on magnification-corrected radiographs of the pelvis by an independent and blinded examiner using digital planning software. Accuracy was defined as the relative postoperative difference between the surgically treated and the unaffected contralateral side for leg length and offset, respectively; precision was defined as the absolute postoperative deviation of leg length and global and femoral offset regardless of lengthening or shortening of leg length and offset throughout the THA. All analyses were performed per intention-to-treat. Results Analyzing the relative accuracy of leg length restoration we found a mean difference of 0.2 mm (95% CI, −1.0 to +1.4 mm; p = 0.729) between fluoroscopy and navigation, 0.2 mm (95 % CI, −0.9 to +1.3 mm; p = 0.740) for global offset and 1.7 mm (95 % CI, +0.4 to +2.9 mm; p = 0.008) for femoral offset. For the absolute precision of leg length and global and femoral offset equalization, there was a mean difference of 1.7 ± 0.3 mm (p < 0.001) between fluoroscopy and navigation. The biomechanical reconstruction with a residual leg length and global and femoral offset discrepancy less than 5 mm and less than 8 mm, respectively, succeeded in 93% and 98%, respectively, in the navigation group and in 54% and 95%, respectively, in the fluoroscopy group. Conclusions Intraoperative fluoroscopy and imageless navigation seem equivalent in accuracy and precision to reconstruct leg length and global and femoral offset during MIS THA with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background With the introduction of a new platform, robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) has been reported as feasible and safe for selected cases. In parallel, the development of real-time near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography using indocyanine green (ICG) has been seen as a help during the dissection, even if the data are still preliminary. The study purpose is to report our experience with ICG RSSC and compare the outcomes to standard RSSC. Methods From February 2011 to December 2011, 44 selected patients underwent RSSC for symptomatic cholelithiasis. Among them, 23 (52.3 %) were included in an experimental protocol using the ICG, and the remainder (47.7 %) underwent standard RSSC. There was no randomization. The endpoints were the perioperative outcomes. This is a prospective study, approved by our local Ethics Committee. Results There were no differences in terms of patients’ characteristics, except that there were more male patients in the ICG group (47.8 vs. 9.5 %; p  = 0.008). Regarding the surgical data, the overall operative time was shorter for the ICG group, especially for patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≤25 (−24 min) but without reaching statistical significance ( p  = 0.06). For BMI >25, no differences were observed. Otherwise, there were no differences in terms of conversion, complications, or length of stay between both groups. Conclusions A RSSC with a real-time near-infrared fluorescent cholangiography can be performed safely. In addition, for selected patients with a low BMI, ICG could shorten the operative time during RSSC. Larger studies are still required before drawing definitive conclusions.

Objective To describe and evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of CT-guided radiofrequency neurolysis (RFN) vs. local blockade of the stellate ganglion in the management of chronic refractory type I complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) of the upper limb. Methods Sixty-seven patients were included in this retrospective study between 2000 and 2011. All suffered from chronic upper limb type I CRPS refractory to conventional pain therapies. Thirty-three patients underwent stellate ganglion blockade and 34 benefited from radiofrequency neurolysis of the stellate ganglion. CT guidance was used in both groups. The procedure was considered effective when pain relief was ≥50 %, lasting for at least 2 years. Results Thirty-nine women (58.2 %) and 28 men (41.8 %) with a mean age of 49.5 years were included in the study. Univariate analysis performed on the blockade and RFN groups showed a significantly ( P  < 0.0001) higher success rate in the RFN group (67.6 %, 23/34) compared with the blockade group (21.2 %, 7/33) with an odds ratio of 7.76. Conclusion CT-guided radiofrequency neurolysis of the stellate ganglion is a safe and successful treatment of chronic refractory type I CRPS of the upper limb. It appears to be more effective than stellate ganglion blockade. Key Points • Complex regional pain syndrome is painful, disabling and often refractory to treatment . • Sixty-seven percent of patients had lasting pain relief (2 years) after radiofrequency neurolysis . • Retrospective study showed a significantly higher success rate for radiofrequency neurolysis . • CT guidance is mandatory for a successful and safe procedure .

PurposeTo compare the accuracy of two-dimensional (2D) versus three-dimensional (3D) image fusion for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) image guidance.Materials and MethodsBetween December 2016 and March 2018, all eligible patients who underwent TEVAR were prospectively included in a single-center study. Image fusion methods (2D/3D or 3D/3D) were randomly assigned to guide each TEVAR and compared in terms of accuracy, dose area product (DAP), volume of contrast medium injected, fluoroscopy time and procedure time.ResultsThirty-two patients were prospectively included; 18 underwent 2D/3D and 14 underwent 3D/3D TEVAR. The 3D/3D method allowed more accurate positioning of the aortic mask on top of the fluoroscopic images (proximal landing zone error vector: 1.7 ± 3.3 mm) than was achieved by the 2D/3D method (6.1 ± 6.1 mm; p = 0.03). The 3D/3D image fusion method was associated with significantly lower DAP than the 2D/3D method (50.5 ± 30.1 Gy cm2 for 3D/3D vs. 99.5 ± 79.1 Gy cm2 for 2D/3D; p = 0.03). The volume of contrast medium injected was significantly lower for the 3D/3D method than for the 2D/3D method (50.6 ± 22.9 ml vs. 98.4 ± 47.9 ml; p = 0.002).ConclusionHigher image fusion accuracy and lower contrast volume and irradiation dose were observed for 3D/3D image fusion than for 2D/3D during TEVAR.Level of EvidenceII, Randomized trial.

Transradial access for cardiac catheterization and intervention is a recognized method for reducing complications and improving patient comfort. However, there are concerns over possible increased operator radiation exposure. We tested the hypothesis that a simple lead drape would reduce operator exposure in transradial procedures. Patients undergoing either diagnostic or interventional procedures using transradial access were assigned in an alternating manner to the use of a 0.5-mm lead apron across the patient's abdomen in addition to standard operator protection. Patients were divided into 4 groups: (left enhanced shielding vs left standard shielding; right enhanced shielding vs right standard shielding). Dosimeters were taped to the primary and secondary operators' left wrist and outside the thyroid guard. The operator exposure was measured for each site on every case in centigray. In standard shielded patients, there was no increase in operator exposure between the left and right approach patients at any measurement site. Measured exposure was reduced with enhanced shielding at all dosimeter sites except the secondary operator's collar (both left and right) and the primary operator's collar from the right. There was no significant difference in fluoroscopy, air kerma, or dose area product between standard and enhanced shielded patients. The use of a lead drape reduces the rate of operator radiation exposure at multiple measurement sites. Use of the left radial approach was not associated with an increase in operator exposure compared with the right radial approach.

Background Interventional radiology includes a range of minimally invasive image-guided diagnostic and therapeutic procedures that have become routine clinical practice. Each procedure involves a percutaneous needle insertion, often guided using computed tomography (CT) because of its availability and usability. However, procedures remain complicated, in particular when an obstacle must be avoided, meaning that an oblique trajectory is required. Navigation systems track the operator’s instruments, meaning the position and progression of the instruments are visualised in real time on the patient’s images. A novel electromagnetic navigation system for CT-guided interventional procedures (IMACTIS-CT®) has been developed, and a previous clinical trial demonstrated improved needle placement accuracy in navigation-assisted procedures. In the present trial, we are evaluating the clinical benefit of the navigation system during the needle insertion step of CT-guided procedures in the thoraco-abdominal region. Methods/design This study is designed as an open, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled interventional clinical trial and is structured as a standard two-arm, parallel-design, individually randomised trial. A maximum of 500 patients will be enrolled. In the experimental arm (navigation system), the procedures are carried out using navigation assistance, and in the active comparator arm (CT), the procedures are carried out with conventional CT guidance. The randomisation is stratified by centre and by the expected difficulty of the procedure. The primary outcome of the trial is a combined criterion to assess the safety (number of serious adverse events), efficacy (number of targets reached) and performance (number of control scans acquired) of navigation-assisted, CT-guided procedures as evaluated by a blinded radiologist and confirmed by an expert committee in case of discordance. The secondary outcomes are (1) the duration of the procedure, (2) the satisfaction of the operator and (3) the irradiation dose delivered, with (4) subgroup analysis according to the expected difficulty of the procedure, as well as an evaluation of (5) the usability of the device. Discussion This trial addresses the lack of published high-level evidence studies in which navigation-assisted CT-guided interventional procedures are evaluated. This trial is important because it addresses the problems associated with conventional CT guidance and is particularly relevant because the number of interventional radiology procedures carried out in routine clinical practice is increasing. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01896219 . Registered on 5 July 2013.