TriangleNCT04083378 · OUTCOME
Minimal Ablative Margin Assessment on Post-ablation Intraprocedural CT.
Results reported by the registry submitting party. Population, time horizon, units and missing values must be read together.
- Measure
- MEAN
- Unit
- mm
- Interval / dispersion
- Standard Deviation
- Time frame
- Visit 2 (baseline/ablation day)
What was measured
For control group, MAM was assessed by rigid co-registration with side-by-side juxtaposition to verify applicator placement and by visual landmark-based CT measurements on CT workstation (Siemens Healthineers; Forchheim, Germany). For experimental group, CT images were processed with a software-based method on a radiation treatment planning system (Raystation, RaySearch Laboratories; Stockholm, Sweden) with biomechanical deformable imaging registration coupled with AI-based autosegmentation. For experimental group, interventional radiologist (IR) was informed of ablation applicator position relative to tumor on non-contrast CT before thermal ablation energy delivery and of MAM results (including spatial location of suboptimal margins) generated by software-based assessment, with this information not disclosed to IR in control group. Software-based assessment was used to compare MAMs results between both study groups with a two-sample t-test.
Analysis population: The primary endpoint included all enrolled patients
Groups in this outcome
Experimental
Clinical impact of Morfeus software usage on patients undergoing percutaneous ablation of liver tumors
Control
Morfeus software was not used during percutaneous ablation of liver tumors
| Group | Source count |
|---|---|
| Experimental | 74 |
| Control | 26 |
Reported measurements
Source class 1
| Group | Value | Spread | Lower | Upper | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | 6.8 | 2.9 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
| Control | 2.2 | 2.8 | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Complete source fields
- classes
- categories
- measurements
- group Id
- OG000
- spread
- 2.9
- value
- 6.8
- group Id
- OG001
- spread
- 2.8
- value
- 2.2
- denoms
- counts
- group Id
- OG000
- value
- 74
- group Id
- OG001
- value
- 26
- units
- Participants
- description
- For control group, MAM was assessed by rigid co-registration with side-by-side juxtaposition to verify applicator placement and by visual landmark-based CT measurements on CT workstation (Siemens Healthineers; Forchheim, Germany). For experimental group, CT images were processed with a software-based method on a radiation treatment planning system (Raystation, RaySearch Laboratories; Stockholm, Sweden) with biomechanical deformable imaging registration coupled with AI-based autosegmentation. For experimental group, interventional radiologist (IR) was informed of ablation applicator position relative to tumor on non-contrast CT before thermal ablation energy delivery and of MAM results (including spatial location of suboptimal margins) generated by software-based assessment, with this information not disclosed to IR in control group. Software-based assessment was used to compare MAMs results between both study groups with a two-sample t-test.
- dispersion Type
- Standard Deviation
- groups
- description
- Clinical impact of Morfeus software usage on patients undergoing percutaneous ablation of liver tumors
- id
- OG000
- title
- Experimental
- description
- Morfeus software was not used during percutaneous ablation of liver tumors
- id
- OG001
- title
- Control
- param Type
- MEAN
- population Description
- The primary endpoint included all enrolled patients
- reporting Status
- POSTED
- time Frame
- Visit 2 (baseline/ablation day)
- title
- Minimal Ablative Margin Assessment on Post-ablation Intraprocedural CT.
- type
- PRIMARY
- unit Of Measure
- mm
Download exact source JSON → · Snapshot ctgov-results-25a395029948b04d52b1253f
Preserved source evidence · Not medical advice