Chemoembolization and Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Riad Salem, Robert J. Lewandowski  Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology  Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages 604-611 (June 2013) DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.039 Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 (A) Schema depicting arterial blood supply to HCC. (B) Demonstration of mechanism of action of bland chemoembolization, drug-eluting beads, and radioembolization. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2013 11, 604-611DOI: (10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.039) Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 (A) T1-weighted gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging reveals a focal-enhancing mass in hepatic segment 7 (arrow). This mass demonstrated venous phase-contrast washout, meeting the guidelines for HCC. After discussion at multidiscipline tumor board, this nonoperative candidate underwent cTACE. (B) A noncontrast computed tomography scan performed immediately after cTACE revealed focal uptake of lipiodol within the targeted tumor (double arrows). There is some nontarget lipiodol uptake in the noncancerous hepatic parenchyma (arrowhead) adjacent to the tumor. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2013 11, 604-611DOI: (10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.039) Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 (A) Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (venous phase) showing 6-cm mass in the hepatic dome (arrow). This tumor showed early phase arterial enhancement, consistent with HCC. This tumor is outside of the Milan transplant criteria. (B) Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging 6 months after yttrium-90 radioembolization. The tumor is now 3 × 3 cm (arrowhead) and is within Milan transplant criteria. This patient underwent liver transplantation. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2013 11, 604-611DOI: (10.1016/j.cgh.2012.12.039) Copyright © 2013 AGA Institute Terms and Conditions