RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Acoustic droplet vaporization (ADV) shows promise for spatial control and acceleration of thermal lesion production. The investigators hypothesized that microbubbles generated by ADV could enhance high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) thermal ablation by controlling and increasing local energy absorption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thermal lesions were produced in tissue-mimicking phantoms using focused ultrasound (1.44 MHz) with a focal intensity of 4000 W · cm(-2) in degassed water at 37°C. The average lesion volume was measured by visible change in optical opacity and by T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. In addition, in vivo HIFU lesions were generated in a canine liver before and after an intravenous injection of droplets with a similar acoustic setup. RESULTS: Thermal lesions were sevenfold larger in phantoms containing droplets (3 × 10(5) droplets/mL) compared to phantoms without droplets. The mean lesion volume with a 2-second HIFU exposure in droplet-containing phantoms was comparable to that made by a 5-second exposure in phantoms without droplets. In the in vivo study, the average lesion volumes without and with droplets were 0.017 ± 0.006 cm(3) (n = 4; 5-second exposure) and 0.265 ± 0.005 cm(3) (n = 3; 5-second exposure), respectively, a factor of 15 difference. The shape of ADV bubbles imaged with B-mode ultrasound was very similar to the actual lesion shape as measured optically and by magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSION: ADV bubbles may facilitate clinical HIFU ablation by reducing treatment time or requisite in situ total acoustic power and provide ultrasonic imaging feedback of the thermal therapy.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Acoustic droplet vaporization (ADV) shows promise for spatial control and acceleration of thermal lesion production. The investigators hypothesized that microbubbles generated by ADV could enhance high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) thermal ablation by controlling and increasing local energy absorption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thermal lesions were produced in tissue-mimicking phantoms using focused ultrasound (1.44 MHz) with a focal intensity of 4000 W · cm(-2) in degassed water at 37°C. The average lesion volume was measured by visible change in optical opacity and by T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. In addition, in vivo HIFU lesions were generated in a canine liver before and after an intravenous injection of droplets with a similar acoustic setup. RESULTS: Thermal lesions were sevenfold larger in phantoms containing droplets (3 × 10(5) droplets/mL) compared to phantoms without droplets. The mean lesion volume with a 2-second HIFU exposure in droplet-containing phantoms was comparable to that made by a 5-second exposure in phantoms without droplets. In the in vivo study, the average lesion volumes without and with droplets were 0.017 ± 0.006 cm(3) (n = 4; 5-second exposure) and 0.265 ± 0.005 cm(3) (n = 3; 5-second exposure), respectively, a factor of 15 difference. The shape of ADV bubbles imaged with B-mode ultrasound was very similar to the actual lesion shape as measured optically and by magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSION: ADV bubbles may facilitate clinical HIFU ablation by reducing treatment time or requisite in situ total acoustic power and provide ultrasonic imaging feedback of the thermal therapy.
Authors: E Schutt; P Barber; T Fields; S Flaim; J Horodniak; P Keipert; R Kinner; L Kornbrust; T Leakakos; T Pelura Journal: Artif Cells Blood Substit Immobil Biotechnol Date: 1994
Authors: Kamen Paskalev; Steven Feigenberg; Rojymon Jacob; Shawn McNeeley; Eric Horwitz; Robert Price; Charlie Ma; Alan Pollack Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2005-11-21 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Linsey C Phillips; Connor Puett; Paul S Sheeran; G Wilson Miller; Terry O Matsunaga; Paul A Dayton Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: Oleksandr Shpak; Martin Verweij; Hendrik J Vos; Nico de Jong; Detlef Lohse; Michel Versluis Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2014-01-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Oliver D Kripfgans; Man Zhang; Mario L Fabiilli; Paul L Carson; Frederic Padilla; Scott D Swanson; Charles Mougenot; J Brian Fowlkes; Charles Mougenot Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 1.840
Authors: James Wang; Christopher V Barback; Casey N Ta; Joi Weeks; Natalie Gude; Robert F Mattrey; Sarah L Blair; William C Trogler; Hotaik Lee; Andrew C Kummel Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2017-08-17 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Cherry C Chen; Paul S Sheeran; Shih-Ying Wu; Oluyemi O Olumolade; Paul A Dayton; Elisa E Konofagou Journal: J Control Release Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: Mario L Fabiilli; Morand R Piert; Robert A Koeppe; Phillip S Sherman; Carole A Quesada; Oliver D Kripfgans Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging Date: 2013 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.161