Literature DB >> 25471983

Microwave ablation energy delivery: influence of power pulsing on ablation results in an ex vivo and in vivo liver model.

Mariajose Bedoya1, Alejandro Muñoz del Rio1, Jason Chiang2, Christopher L Brace3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of continuous and pulsed energy deliveries on microwave ablation growth and shape in unperfused and perfused liver models.
METHODS: A total of 15 kJ at 2.45 GHz was applied to ex vivo bovine liver using one of five delivery methods (n = 50 total, 10 per group): 25 W continuous for 10 min (25 W average), 50 W continuous for 5 min (50 W average), 100 W continuous for 2.5 min (100 W average), 100 W pulsed for 10 min (25 W average), and 100 W pulsed for 5 min (50 W average). A total of 30 kJ was applied to in vivo porcine livers (n = 35, 7 per group) using delivery methods similar to the ex vivo study, but with twice the total ablation time to offset heat loss to blood perfusion. Temperatures were monitored 5-20 mm from the ablation antenna, with values over 60 °C indicating acute cellular necrosis. Comparisons of ablation size and shape were made between experimental groups based on total energy delivery, average power applied, and peak power using ANOVA with post-hoc pairwise tests.
RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in ablation sizes or circularities between pulsed and continuous groups in ex vivo tissue. Temperature data demonstrated more rapid heating in pulsed ablations, suggesting that pulsing may overcome blood perfusion and coagulate tissues more rapidly in vivo. Differences in ablation size and shape were noted in vivo despite equivalent energy delivery among all groups. Overall, the largest ablation volume in vivo was produced with 100 W continuous for 5 min (265.7 ± 208.1 cm(3)). At 25 W average, pulsed-power ablation volumes were larger than continuous-power ablations (67.4 ± 34.5 cm(3) versus 23.6 ± 26.5 cm(3), P = 0.43). Similarly, pulsed ablations produced significantly greater length (P ≤ 0.01), with increase in diameter (P = 0.09) and a slight decrease in circularity (P = 0.97). When comparing 50 W average power groups, moderate differences in size were noted (P ≥ 0.06) and pulsed ablations were again slightly more circular.
CONCLUSIONS: Pulsed energy delivery created larger ablation zones at low average power compared to continuous energy delivery in the presence of blood perfusion. Shorter duty cycles appear to provide greater benefit when pulsing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25471983      PMCID: PMC4240778          DOI: 10.1118/1.4901312

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  36 in total

Review 1.  Thermal ablation therapy for focal malignancy: a unified approach to underlying principles, techniques, and diagnostic imaging guidance.

Authors:  S N Goldberg; G S Gazelle; P R Mueller
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Microwaves create larger ablations than radiofrequency when controlled for power in ex vivo tissue.

Authors:  A Andreano; Yu Huang; M Franca Meloni; Fred T Lee; Christopher Brace
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Radiofrequency versus microwave ablation in a hepatic porcine model.

Authors:  Andrew S Wright; Lisa A Sampson; Thomas F Warner; David M Mahvi; Fred T Lee
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 11.105

4.  Effect of variation of portal venous blood flow on radiofrequency and microwave ablations in a blood-perfused bovine liver model.

Authors:  Gerald D Dodd; Nicholas A Dodd; Anthony C Lanctot; Deborah A Glueck
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-01-07       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  International multicentre prospective study on microwave ablation of liver tumours: preliminary results.

Authors:  David M Lloyd; Kwan N Lau; Fenella Welsh; Kit-Fai Lee; David J Sherlock; Michael A Choti; John B Martinie; David A Iannitti
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 6.  Microwave tumor ablation: mechanism of action, clinical results, and devices.

Authors:  Meghan G Lubner; Christopher L Brace; J Louis Hinshaw; Fred T Lee
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.464

7.  Expanded modeling of temperature-dependent dielectric properties for microwave thermal ablation.

Authors:  Zhen Ji; Christopher L Brace
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-07-26       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Prognostic factors for long-term outcome after percutaneous thermal ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a survival analysis of 137 consecutive patients.

Authors:  H-X Xu; M-D Lu; X-Y Xie; X-Y Yin; M Kuang; J-W Chen; Z-F Xu; G-J Liu
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 9.  Tumor ablation: common modalities and general practices.

Authors:  Erica M Knavel; Christopher L Brace
Journal:  Tech Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2013-12

10.  Contribution of direct heating, thermal conduction and perfusion during radiofrequency and microwave ablation.

Authors:  W Schramm; D Yang; D Haemmerich
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2006
View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Microwave ablation in primary and secondary liver tumours: technical and clinical approaches.

Authors:  Maria Franca Meloni; Jason Chiang; Paul F Laeseke; Christoph F Dietrich; Angela Sannino; Marco Solbiati; Elisabetta Nocerino; Christopher L Brace; Fred T Lee
Journal:  Int J Hyperthermia       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 3.914

2.  MR visible localization device for radiographic-pathologic correlation of surgical specimens.

Authors:  Sonja Kinner; Tilman B Schubert; Elisabetta A Nocerino; Shannon Hynes; Timothy J Colgan; Agnes G Loeffler; Christopher Brace; Scott B Reeder; Emily Winslow
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2016-11-27       Impact factor: 2.546

3.  Effects of pulsating heat source on interstitial fluid transport in tumour tissues.

Authors:  A Andreozzi; M Iasiello; P A Netti
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 4.118

4.  Performance of the Emprint and Amica Microwave Ablation Systems in ex vivo Porcine Livers: Sphericity and Reproducibility Versus Size.

Authors:  P Hendriks; W E M Berkhout; C I Kaanen; J H Sluijter; I J Visser; J J van den Dobbelsteen; L F de Geus-Oei; A G Webb; M C Burgmans
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 5.  Liver microwave ablation: a systematic review of various FDA-approved systems.

Authors:  Simeon J S Ruiter; Wouter J Heerink; Koert P de Jong
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Millimeter-wave pulsed heating in vitro: cell mortality and heat shock response.

Authors:  Rosa Orlacchio; Yann Le Page; Yves Le Dréan; Rémy Le Guével; Ronan Sauleau; Stanislav Alekseev; Maxim Zhadobov
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Continuous versus pulsed microwave ablation in the liver: any difference in intraoperative pain scores?

Authors:  Dimitrios Filippiadis; Argyro Mazioti; George Velonakis; Athanasios Tsochantzis; Nevio Tosoratti; Alexis Kelekis; Nikolaos Kelekis
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-11-20

8.  Pulsed Microwave Liver Ablation: An Additional Tool to Treat Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Giacomo Zanus; Giovanni Tagliente; Serena Rossi; Alessandro Bonis; Mattia Zambon; Michele Scopelliti; Marco Brizzolari; Ugo Grossi; Maurizio Romano; Michele Finotti
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 6.639

9.  MR-Guided High-Power Microwave Ablation in Hepatic Malignancies: Initial Results in Clinical Routine.

Authors:  Moritz T Winkelmann; Georg Gohla; Jens Kübler; Jakob Weiß; Stephan Clasen; Konstantin Nikolaou; Rüdiger Hoffmann
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 2.740

10.  How large is the periablational zone after radiofrequency and microwave ablation? Computer-based comparative study of two currently used clinical devices.

Authors:  Macarena Trujillo; Punit Prakash; Pegah Faridi; Aleksandar Radosevic; Sergio Curto; Fernando Burdio; Enrique Berjano
Journal:  Int J Hyperthermia       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 3.914

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.