PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that magnetic resonance (MR) imaging measurements can be used to immediately detect treated tissue regions after irreversible electroporation (IRE) ablation procedures in rodent liver tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All experiments received institutional animal care and use committee approval. In four rats for preliminary studies and 18 rats for formal assessment, MR imaging-compatible electrodes were inserted into the liver and MR imaging-monitored IRE procedures were performed at one of three electrode voltages (1000, 1500, or 2500 V), with T1- and T2-weighted images acquired before and immediately after application of the IRE pulses. MR imaging measurements were compared with both finite element modeling (FEM)-anticipated ablation zones and histologically confirmed ablation zones at necropsy. Intraclass and Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for statistical comparisons. RESULTS: MR imaging measurements permitted immediate depiction of IRE ablation zones that were hypointense on T1-weighted images and hyperintense on T2-weighted images. MR imaging-based measurements demonstrated excellent consistency with FEM-anticipated ablation zones (r > 0.90 and P < .001 for both T1- and T2-weighted images). MR imaging measurements were also highly correlated with histologically confirmed ablation zone measurements (rho > 0.90 and P < .001 for both T1- and T2-weighted images). CONCLUSION: MR imaging permits immediate depiction of ablated tissue zones for monitoring of IRE ablation procedures. These measurements could potentially be used during treatment to elicit repeat application of IRE pulses or adjustments to electrode positions to ensure complete treatment of targeted lesions.
PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that magnetic resonance (MR) imaging measurements can be used to immediately detect treated tissue regions after irreversible electroporation (IRE) ablation procedures in rodent liver tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All experiments received institutional animal care and use committee approval. In four rats for preliminary studies and 18 rats for formal assessment, MR imaging-compatible electrodes were inserted into the liver and MR imaging-monitored IRE procedures were performed at one of three electrode voltages (1000, 1500, or 2500 V), with T1- and T2-weighted images acquired before and immediately after application of the IRE pulses. MR imaging measurements were compared with both finite element modeling (FEM)-anticipated ablation zones and histologically confirmed ablation zones at necropsy. Intraclass and Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated for statistical comparisons. RESULTS: MR imaging measurements permitted immediate depiction of IRE ablation zones that were hypointense on T1-weighted images and hyperintense on T2-weighted images. MR imaging-based measurements demonstrated excellent consistency with FEM-anticipated ablation zones (r > 0.90 and P < .001 for both T1- and T2-weighted images). MR imaging measurements were also highly correlated with histologically confirmed ablation zone measurements (rho > 0.90 and P < .001 for both T1- and T2-weighted images). CONCLUSION: MR imaging permits immediate depiction of ablated tissue zones for monitoring of IRE ablation procedures. These measurements could potentially be used during treatment to elicit repeat application of IRE pulses or adjustments to electrode positions to ensure complete treatment of targeted lesions.
Authors: Benjamin L Viglianti; Michael Lora-Michiels; Jeanie M Poulson; Lan Lan; Daohai Yu; Dahio Yu; Linda Sanders; Oana Craciunescu; Zeljko Vujaskovic; Donald E Thrall; James Macfall; Cecil H Charles; Terence Wong; Mark W Dewhirst Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-07-21 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Yang Guo; Yue Zhang; Ning Jin; Rachel Klein; Jodi Nicolai; Robert J Lewandowski; Robert K Ryu; Reed A Omary; Andrew C Larson Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Zhuoli Zhang; Weiguo Li; Daniel Procissi; Patrick Tyler; Reed A Omary; Andrew C Larson Journal: Nanomedicine (Lond) Date: 2013-09-11 Impact factor: 5.307
Authors: Samdeep K Mouli; Patrick Tyler; Joseph L McDevitt; Aaron C Eifler; Yang Guo; Jodi Nicolai; Robert J Lewandowski; Weiguo Li; Daniel Procissi; Robert K Ryu; Y Andrew Wang; Riad Salem; Andrew C Larson; Reed A Omary Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2013-08-20 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Matteo Figini; Xifu Wang; Tianchu Lyu; Zhanliang Su; Bin Wang; Chong Sun; Junjie Shangguan; Liang Pan; Kang Zhou; Quanhong Ma; Vahid Yaghmai; Daniele Procissi; Andrew C Larson; Zhuoli Zhang Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2018-08-01 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Xifu Wang; Zhanliang Su; Tianchu Lyu; Matteo Figini; Daniel Procissi; Junjie Shangguan; Chong Sun; Bin Wang; Na Shang; Shanzhi Gu; Quanhong Ma; Andrew C Gordon; Kai Lin; Jian Wang; Robert J Lewandowski; Riad Salem; Vahid Yaghmai; Andrew C Larson; Zhuoli Zhang Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-12-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Yang Guo; Yue Zhang; Grace M Nijm; Alan V Sahakian; Guang-Yu Yang; Reed A Omary; Andrew C Larson Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-12-03 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Anna J Shangguan; Chong Sun; Bin Wang; Liang Pan; Quanhong Ma; Su Hu; Jia Yang; Aydin Eresen; Yuri Velichko; Vahid Yaghmai; Zhuoli Zhang Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Yue Zhang; Sarah B White; Jodi R Nicolai; Zhuoli Zhang; Derek L West; Dong-Hyun Kim; A Lee Goodwin; Frank H Miller; Reed A Omary; Andrew C Larson Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-02-18 Impact factor: 11.105