Background and aims: Standardized quantitative criteria are lacking for the recommended circumferential thermal ablative margin in liver malignancies ≤3 cm. This study aimed to identify predictors of technical success in thermal ablation and develop a predictive model defining optimal ablation margins. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 979 patients undergoing computed tomography-guided radiofrequency or microwave ablation for liver malignancies ≤3 cm. Using a radiotherapy treatment planning system, preoperative tumor dimensions maximum tumor area, preoperative maximum tumor area (PreMTA) ; tumor volume, preoperative tumor volume (PreTV) and postoperative ablation characteristics maximum ablation area, postoperative maximum ablation area (Post-MAA) ; ablation volume, postoperative ablation volume (PostAV) were volumetrically quantified. Volume ratio (PostAV/PreTV) and area ratio (PostMAA/PreMTA) were calculated. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression identified predictors of residual tumor. A nomogram was developed and validated using Harrell’s C-index, calibration curves, and receiver operating characteristic analysis. Size- and location-specific margin recommendations were derived mathematically. Results: Residual tumor occurred in 91 patients (9. 3%). Multivariate analysis identified adjacent large vessel odd ratio (OR) = 1. 97; P = 0. 015, larger PreMTA (OR = 1. 44; P = 0. 014), and lower volume ratio (OR = 0. 77; P = 0. 009) as independent predictors. For non-perivascular tumors, optimal volume ratios were 4. 3, 6. 0, and 8. 8 (corresponding Δ R = 0. 3 cm, 0. 8 cm, 1. 6 cm) for diameters 1. 0 cm, 2. 0 cm, and 3. 0 cm, respectively. A web-based calculator was implemented (https: //fbzl. org/monitor/ablationₘodel. html). Conclusions: This study establishes and validates a computational model defining tumor size- and vessel proximity-specific optimal ablation margins for liver malignancies ≤3 cm. The web-accessible model provides evidence-based individualized ablation targets that optimize oncological efficacy while preserving parenchyma, replacing conventional fixed margins.
Qiu et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: