Thomas Wimmer1,2, Govindarajan Srimathveeravalli3, Mikhail Silk3, Sebastien Monette4, Narendra Gutta3, Majid Maybody3, Joseph P Erinjery3, Jonathan A Coleman5, Stephen B Solomon3, Constantinos T Sofocleous3. 1. Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA thomas.wimmer@medunigraz.at. 2. Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. 3. Interventional Radiology Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. 4. Laboratory of Comparative Pathology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA. 5. Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To test the feasibility of modified biopsy needles as probes for irreversible electroporation ablation and periprocedural biopsy. METHODS: Core biopsy needles of 16-G/9-cm were customized to serve as experimental ablation probes. Computed tomography-guided percutaneous irreversible electroporation was performed in in vivo porcine kidneys with pairs of experimental (n = 10) or standard probes (n = 10) using a single parameter set (1667 V/cm, ninety 100 µs pulses). Two biopsy samples were taken immediately following ablation using the experimental probes (n = 20). Ablation outcomes were compared using computed tomography, simulation, and histology. Biopsy and necropsy histology were compared. RESULTS: Simulation-suggested ablations with experimental probes were smaller than that with standard electrodes (455.23 vs 543.16 mm2), although both exhibited similar shape. Computed tomography (standard: 556 ± 61 mm2, experimental: 515 ± 67 mm2; P = .25) and histology (standard: 313 ± 77 mm2, experimental: 275 ± 75 mm2; P = .29) indicated ablations with experimental probes were not significantly different from the standard. Histopathology indicated similar morphological changes in both groups. Biopsies from the ablation zone yielded at least 1 core with sufficient tissue for analysis (11 of the 20). CONCLUSIONS: A combined probe for irreversible electroporation ablation and periprocedural tissue sampling from the ablation zone is feasible. Ablation outcomes are comparable to those of standard electrodes.
OBJECTIVES: To test the feasibility of modified biopsy needles as probes for irreversible electroporation ablation and periprocedural biopsy. METHODS: Core biopsy needles of 16-G/9-cm were customized to serve as experimental ablation probes. Computed tomography-guided percutaneous irreversible electroporation was performed in in vivo porcine kidneys with pairs of experimental (n = 10) or standard probes (n = 10) using a single parameter set (1667 V/cm, ninety 100 µs pulses). Two biopsy samples were taken immediately following ablation using the experimental probes (n = 20). Ablation outcomes were compared using computed tomography, simulation, and histology. Biopsy and necropsy histology were compared. RESULTS: Simulation-suggested ablations with experimental probes were smaller than that with standard electrodes (455.23 vs 543.16 mm2), although both exhibited similar shape. Computed tomography (standard: 556 ± 61 mm2, experimental: 515 ± 67 mm2; P = .25) and histology (standard: 313 ± 77 mm2, experimental: 275 ± 75 mm2; P = .29) indicated ablations with experimental probes were not significantly different from the standard. Histopathology indicated similar morphological changes in both groups. Biopsies from the ablation zone yielded at least 1 core with sufficient tissue for analysis (11 of the 20). CONCLUSIONS: A combined probe for irreversible electroporation ablation and periprocedural tissue sampling from the ablation zone is feasible. Ablation outcomes are comparable to those of standard electrodes.
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
Authors: Constantinos T Sofocleous; Rodrigo G Nascimento; Lydia M Petrovic; David S Klimstra; Mithat Gonen; Karen T Brown; Lynn A Brody; Anne M Covey; Raymond H Thornton; Yuman Fong; Stephen B Solomon; Lawrence H Schwartz; Ronald P DeMatteo; George I Getrajdman Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Sho Fujisawa; Yevgeniy Romin; Afsar Barlas; Lydia M Petrovic; Mesruh Turkekul; Ning Fan; Ke Xu; Alessandra R Garcia; Sebastien Monette; David S Klimstra; Joseph P Erinjeri; Stephen B Solomon; Katia Manova-Todorova; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: Cytotechnology Date: 2013-09-25 Impact factor: 2.058
Authors: William F Pritchard; Diane Wray-Cahen; John W Karanian; Stephen Hilbert; Bradford J Wood Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Waleed Shady; Elena N Petre; Kinh Gian Do; Mithat Gonen; Hooman Yarmohammadi; Karen T Brown; Nancy E Kemeny; Michael D'Angelica; Peter T Kingham; Stephen B Solomon; Constantinos T Sofocleous Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2017-12-06 Impact factor: 3.464