Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Thermal ablation of liver tumours is widely established. A location in vicinity of the gallbladder (GB) usually causes apprehension. Our intention was to gather data from our day-to-day practice to assess whether pericholecystic tumours can be ablated safely without protective measures.</p> Materials and Methods <p>Retrospective review of patient series undergoing microwave ablation of primary and secondary pericholecystic liver tumours (segments IVb–V) without hydro-pneumodissection between September 2018 and September 2025, in which the ablation zone encompassed the GB wall. Outcomes are technical success (&gt; 5&#xa0;mm safety margins), complication rate, hospital stay length, postoperative pain, modified gastrointestinal symptoms rating scale (mGSRS) score at 24h, rate of 30-day hospital readmission 3-, 6-, 12-month local tumour progression-free survival (LTPFS).</p> Results <p>Forty-eight patients were included; 34 (70.8%) were males. Average age was 67&#xa0;years (SD ± 10.2). Hepatocellular carcinoma was the most common diagnosis. Twenty-six (54.2%) procedures were performed on a single lesion near GB. Technical success was 100%. No severe complications were seen. Average pain score was 1.9 (SD ± 1.8; median 1, IQR 0.75–2.25), and mGSRS score was 8.6 (SD ± 5.8; median 7.5 IQR 4–11); average hospital stay length was 1.9&#xa0;days (SD ± 2.3; median 1 day; IQR 1–2&#xa0;days). Four patients (8.3%) required readmission: 1 (2.1%) due to delayed cholecystitis (treated conservatively) and 3 (6.3%) due to pain, but no additional intervention. 3-, 6-, 12-month LTPFS was 94%, 89% and 80%.</p> Conclusion <p>The incidence of GB injury was low in this series, and the procedures were well tolerated. A protective hydro- or pneumodissection was found to be not essential.</p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Who is Afraid of the Gallbladder? Case Series of Unmitigated Pericholecystic Microwave Ablations of Liver Tumours with Pictorial Review

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月19日

查看全文
  • Umberto Pisano,
  • David Hunter Kay

摘要

Purpose

Thermal ablation of liver tumours is widely established. A location in vicinity of the gallbladder (GB) usually causes apprehension. Our intention was to gather data from our day-to-day practice to assess whether pericholecystic tumours can be ablated safely without protective measures.

Materials and Methods

Retrospective review of patient series undergoing microwave ablation of primary and secondary pericholecystic liver tumours (segments IVb–V) without hydro-pneumodissection between September 2018 and September 2025, in which the ablation zone encompassed the GB wall. Outcomes are technical success (> 5 mm safety margins), complication rate, hospital stay length, postoperative pain, modified gastrointestinal symptoms rating scale (mGSRS) score at 24h, rate of 30-day hospital readmission 3-, 6-, 12-month local tumour progression-free survival (LTPFS).

Results

Forty-eight patients were included; 34 (70.8%) were males. Average age was 67 years (SD ± 10.2). Hepatocellular carcinoma was the most common diagnosis. Twenty-six (54.2%) procedures were performed on a single lesion near GB. Technical success was 100%. No severe complications were seen. Average pain score was 1.9 (SD ± 1.8; median 1, IQR 0.75–2.25), and mGSRS score was 8.6 (SD ± 5.8; median 7.5 IQR 4–11); average hospital stay length was 1.9 days (SD ± 2.3; median 1 day; IQR 1–2 days). Four patients (8.3%) required readmission: 1 (2.1%) due to delayed cholecystitis (treated conservatively) and 3 (6.3%) due to pain, but no additional intervention. 3-, 6-, 12-month LTPFS was 94%, 89% and 80%.

Conclusion

The incidence of GB injury was low in this series, and the procedures were well tolerated. A protective hydro- or pneumodissection was found to be not essential.

Graphical Abstract