OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to evaluate differences between 915-MHz and 2.45-GHz microwave ablation (MWA) systems in the ablation of hepatic tumours. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing hepatic tumour MWA utilizing two different systems over a 10-month period was carried out. RESULTS: Data for a total of 48 patients with a mean age of 58 ± 1.24 years were analysed. A total of 124 tumours were ablated; 72 tumours were ablated with a 915-MHz system and 52 with a 2.45-GHz system. Mean tumour diameters were 1.7 ± 0.1 cm in the 915-MHz group and 2.5 ± 0.2 cm in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.01). Mean ablation time per burn was 8.1 ± 0.3 min in the 915-MHz group and 4.0 ± 0.1 min in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.01). The mean number of burns per lesion was 2.0 ± 0.1 in the 915-MHz group and 1.7 ± 0.1 in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.05). The mean ablation time per lesion was 9.7 ± 0.7 min in the 915-MHz group, and 6.6 ± 0.6 min in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.01). The 2.45-GHz system demonstrated a better correlation between ablation time and tumour size (r(2) = 0.6222) than the 915-MHz system; (r(2) = 0.0696). Mean total energy applied per lesion, and energy applied per cm, were greater with the 915-MHz system (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). Total energy applied per lesion was similarly correlated for the 2.45-GHz (r(2) = 0.6263) and 915-MHz (r(2) = 0.7012) systems. Mean total energy applied per cm/min was greater with the 2.45-GHz system (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both 915-MHz and 2.45-GHz MWA systems achieve reproducible hepatic tumour ablation. The 2.45-GHz system achieves equivalent, but more predictable and faster ablations using a single antenna system.
OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to evaluate differences between 915-MHz and 2.45-GHz microwave ablation (MWA) systems in the ablation of hepatic tumours. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing hepatic tumour MWA utilizing two different systems over a 10-month period was carried out. RESULTS: Data for a total of 48 patients with a mean age of 58 ± 1.24 years were analysed. A total of 124 tumours were ablated; 72 tumours were ablated with a 915-MHz system and 52 with a 2.45-GHz system. Mean tumour diameters were 1.7 ± 0.1 cm in the 915-MHz group and 2.5 ± 0.2 cm in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.01). Mean ablation time per burn was 8.1 ± 0.3 min in the 915-MHz group and 4.0 ± 0.1 min in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.01). The mean number of burns per lesion was 2.0 ± 0.1 in the 915-MHz group and 1.7 ± 0.1 in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.05). The mean ablation time per lesion was 9.7 ± 0.7 min in the 915-MHz group, and 6.6 ± 0.6 min in the 2.45-GHz group (P < 0.01). The 2.45-GHz system demonstrated a better correlation between ablation time and tumour size (r(2) = 0.6222) than the 915-MHz system; (r(2) = 0.0696). Mean total energy applied per lesion, and energy applied per cm, were greater with the 915-MHz system (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). Total energy applied per lesion was similarly correlated for the 2.45-GHz (r(2) = 0.6263) and 915-MHz (r(2) = 0.7012) systems. Mean total energy applied per cm/min was greater with the 2.45-GHz system (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both 915-MHz and 2.45-GHz MWA systems achieve reproducible hepatic tumour ablation. The 2.45-GHz system achieves equivalent, but more predictable and faster ablations using a single antenna system.
Authors: William W Hope; Thomas M Schmelzer; William L Newcomb; Jessica J Heath; Amy E Lincourt; H James Norton; B Todd Heniford; David A Iannitti Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-09-06 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Thomas J Vogl; Andrei Roman; Nour-Eldin A Nour-Eldin; Wolfgang Hohenforst-Schmidt; Iliana Bednarova; Benjamin Kaltenbach Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2018 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Imran A Siddiqui; Eduardo L Latouche; Matthew R DeWitt; Jacob H Swet; Russell C Kirks; Erin H Baker; David A Iannitti; Dionisios Vrochides; Rafael V Davalos; Iain H McKillop Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Erin H Baker; Kyle Thompson; Iain H McKillop; Allyson Cochran; Russell Kirks; Dionisios Vrochides; John B Martinie; Ryan Z Swan; David A Iannitti Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2017-04
Authors: U Leung; D Kuk; M I D'Angelica; T P Kingham; P J Allen; R P DeMatteo; W R Jarnagin; Y Fong Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: José Irving Hernández; Mario Francisco Jesús Cepeda; Francisco Valdés; Geshel David Guerrero Journal: Onco Targets Ther Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Julian Bonello; Andrea Demarco; Iman Farhat; Lourdes Farrugia; Charles V Sammut Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-08-18 Impact factor: 3.576