Review article
Complications Following Radioembolization with Yttrium-90 Microspheres: A Comprehensive Literature Review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2009.05.030Get rights and content

The past decade has seen significant advancement in the locoregional management of liver tumors; novel and promising therapies such as transarterial chemoembolization, radioembolization, and radiofrequency ablation are now available. The development of new techniques and devices has led to the improved safety and efficacy profiles of external-beam radiation. Radioembolization with yttrium-90 (90Y) microspheres has emerged as a safe and efficacious treatment modality for liver malignancies. The purpose of this article is to present a comprehensive evidence-based review of the complications and adverse events that may be associated with radioembolization with 90Y microspheres. Strategies to mitigate these adverse events are also discussed.

Section snippets

Primary Tumors

THE most common primary malignancy of the liver is hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); its incidence is increasing worldwide. It ranks as the sixth most common malignancy and third most common cause of cancer-related mortality (1, 2). The management of liver tumors has seen significant advancement in the past decade with the development of new screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic modalities. Primary liver tumors include HCC and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Surgical resection is considered

Pretreatment Evaluation

HCC is diagnosed on imaging if there is a lesion greater than 2 cm with arterial-phase enhancement and venous washout (17). Biopsy is performed in lesions that do not have the typical radiologic findings as defined by the European Association for the Study of the Liver and American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines (18). The role of α-fetoprotein in diagnosis of HCC is not yet established. Secondary liver tumors are diagnosed by imaging with fluorodeoxyglucose positron

Yttrium-90

90Y is a pure β-emitter. It has an average β-energy emission of 0.9367 MeV and a maximum of 2.1 MeV. The mean tissue penetration is 2.5 mm with a maximum of 10 mm.

TheraSphere

TheraSphere particles (MDS Nordion, Ottawa, ON, Canada) are glass microspheres 20–30 μm in size with 90Y as anintegral constituent (26). One 3-GBq vial contains 1.2 million particles. Given the low particle number, the particles impart a minimal embolic effect (27). This device was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use

Complications of Radioembolization

The complications occurring after radioembolization can be broadly classified into the following groups: postradioembolization syndrome (PRS), hepatic dysfunction, biliary sequelae, portal hypertension, radiation pneumonitis, GI ulceration, vascular injury, lymphopenia, and a miscellaneous category. These will be discussed in the following evidence-based review of the published literature.

PRS

Patients may experience a mild PRS that consists of the following clinical symptoms: fatigue, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, fever, abdominal discomfort, and cachexia. Hospitalization is usually not required. PRS is less severe than the posttreatment syndromes observed after other embolic therapies in which fatigue and constitutional symptoms predominate (11, 27, 32, 33). Mild abdominal pain may be experienced after radioembolization (21, 33). As a result of the lack of macroscopic embolization

Conclusion

The mild adverse events and constitutional symptoms after radioembolization rarely require hospitalization. Serious adverse events can be mitigated if proper patients are selected, accepted dosimetry models used, and meticulous technique employed (Table 2). Patients with poor liver function before treatment are more prone to develop RILD. Derangement in liver function can be prevented by lobar or segmental injection and avoidance of whole-liver treatment (35). Biliary sequelae occur mostly

References (59)

  • R. Salem et al.

    Technical aspects of radioembolization with 90Y microspheres

    Tech Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2007)
  • R. Salem et al.

    Yttrium-90 microspheres: radiation therapy for unresectable liver cancer

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2002)
  • R. Salem et al.

    Radioembolization with 90yttrium microspheres: a state-of-the-art brachytherapy treatment for primary and secondary liver malignanciesPart 1: technical and methodologic considerations

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2006)
  • A.S. Kennedy et al.

    Resin 90Y-microsphere brachytherapy for unresectable colorectal liver metastases: modern USA experience

    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys

    (2006)
  • R. Murthy et al.

    Yttrium 90 resin microspheres for the treatment of unresectable colorectal hepatic metastases after failure of multiple chemotherapy regimens: preliminary results

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2005)
  • J.Y. Young et al.

    Radiation dose limits and liver toxicities resulting from multiple yttrium-90 radioembolization treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2007)
  • B. Atassi et al.

    Biliary sequelae following radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2008)
  • T.K. Rhee et al.

    Tumor response after yttrium-90 radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of diffusion-weighted functional mr imaging with anatomic MR imaging

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2008)
  • R. Salem et al.

    Radioembolization with 90yttrium microspheres: a state-of-the-art brachytherapy treatment for primary and secondary liver malignanciesPart 2: special topics

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2006)
  • T.W. Leung et al.

    Radiation pneumonitis after selective internal radiation treatment with intraarterial 90yttrium-microspheres for inoperable hepatic tumors

    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys

    (1995)
  • R. Murthy et al.

    Gastrointestinal complications associated with hepatic arterial yttrium-90 microsphere therapy

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2007)
  • R. Murthy et al.

    Hepatic yttrium-90 radioembolotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab or bevacizumab

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2007)
  • Q.M. Leong et al.

    Radiation dermatitis following radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a case for prophylactic embolization of a patent falciform artery

    J Vasc Interv Radiol

    (2009)
  • M.P. Lilly et al.

    Anatomic and clinical factors associated with complications of transfemoral arteriography

    Ann Vasc Surg

    (1990)
  • D.M. Parkin et al.

    Global cancer statistics, 2002

    CA Cancer J Clin

    (2005)
  • V. Mazzaferro et al.

    Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis

    N Engl J Med

    (1996)
  • L.M. Kulik et al.

    Yttrium-90 microspheres (TheraSphere(R)) treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: downstaging to resection, RFA and bridge to transplantation

    J Surg Oncol

    (2006)
  • D.S. Lu et al.

    Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: treatment success as defined by histologic examination of the explanted liver

    Radiology

    (2005)
  • Y.K. Maddala et al.

    Drop-out rates of patients with hepatocellular cancer listed for liver transplantation: outcome with chemoembolization

    Liver Transpl

    (2004)
  • Cited by (266)

    • Sample forms and templates

      2023, Translational Interventional Radiology
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    R.S. is a paid consultant for MDS Nordion (Ottawa, Ontario, Canada) and has served on advisory boards for Sirtex Medical (Lane Cove, Australia). None of the other authors have identified a conflict of interest.

    View full text