| Literature DB >> 26852219 |
Laura G Merckel1, Floor M Knuttel2, Roel Deckers3, Thijs van Dalen4, Gerald Schubert5, Nicky H G M Peters2, Teun Weits6, Paul J van Diest7, Willem P Th M Mali2, Paul H H B Vaessen8, Joost M H H van Gorp9, Chrit T W Moonen3, Lambertus W Bartels3, Maurice A A J van den Bosch2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and feasibility of MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) ablation in breast cancer patients using a dedicated breast platform.Entities:
Keywords: Ablation; Breast cancer; High-intensity focused ultrasound; Magnetic resonance imaging; Minimally invasive treatment
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26852219 PMCID: PMC5052313 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-016-4222-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Fig. 1A schematic overview of procedures during MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) treatment
Baseline characteristics of breast cancer patients who underwent MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) treatment
| Patients | n (%) |
|---|---|
| No. of patients | 10 |
| Age in years, mean ± SD | 54.8 ± 12.5 |
| Treated tumours | |
| Tumours in right breast | 6 (60.0) |
| Tumour location | |
| Upper outer quadrant | 3 (30.0) |
| Lower outer quadrant | 5 (50.0) |
| Upper inner quadrant | 2 (20.0) |
| Lower inner quadrant | 0 (0.0) |
| Interval between HIFU and surgery | |
| Time in days, mean ± SD | 5.0 ± 2.2 |
| Type of surgery | |
| Lumpectomy | 8 (80.0) |
| Mastectomy | 1 (10.0) |
| No surgery | 1 (10.0) |
| Axilla | |
| Sentinel lymph node procedure | 8 (80.0) |
| Axillary dissection | 1 (10.0) |
| No axillary procedure | 1 (10.0) |
| Pathology | |
| Tumour size in mm, mean ± SD | 20.0 ± 5.6* |
| Type carcinoma | |
| Invasive ductal carcinoma | 8 (80.0) |
| Invasive lobular carcinoma | 2 (20.0) |
*Analyzed without the patient who refused surgery
Time distribution of MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) treatment
| Stage of the procedure | Time in min, mean ± SD (range) |
|---|---|
| Positioning on treatment table | 25 ± 10 (5–39) |
| Pre-treatment imaging from contrast injection to the first (test) sonication | 59 ± 27 (32–106) |
| Treatment time (from first to last sonication) | 46 ± 17 (12–75) |
| Post-treatment imaging after the last sonication | 14 ± 3 (7–19) |
| Overall procedure time | 145 ± 29 (96–210) |
| Overall sonication time | 1.7 ± 0.8 (0.3–2.6) |
An overview of the sonications, size, power, duration of sonications, maximum temperature and size of the area(s) that reached a temperature higher than 55 °C for all patients
| Patient | Sonication | Size (mm) | Power (W) | Duration (s) | Max temp (°C) | Temp > 55 °C (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 (test) | 3 | 30 | 8.5* | NA† | NA† |
| 2 | 6 | 100 | 8.6* | |||
| 2 | 1 (test) | 3 | 30 | 16.1* | NA† | NA† |
| 2 | 3 | 70 | 19.7* | |||
| 3 (test) | 3 | 30 | 12.3* | |||
| 4 | 6 | 60 | 14.9* | |||
| 5 | 6 | 50 | 24.6 | |||
| 6 | 6 | 70 | 22.1* | |||
| 3 | 1 (test) | 3 | 40 | 12.9* | 56.1 | 10 × 7 |
| 2 | 6 | 70 | 16.8* | 52.6 | 3 × 3 | |
| 4 | 1 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.2 | 55.7 | 5 × 5 |
| 2 | 6 | 50 | 24.6 | 59.0 | 3 × 2 | |
| 3 | 6 | 50 | 24.6 | 58.3 | 7 × 5 | |
| 4 | 6 | 50 | 24.6 | 59.1 | 5 × 3 | |
| 5 | 1 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.0 | NA‡ | NA‡ |
| 2 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.0 | NA‡ | NA‡ | |
| 3 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.0 | 55.7 | 8 × 7 | |
| 4 (test) | 3 | 30 | 20.0 | 51.1 | No | |
| 5 | 6 | 50 | 24.5 | 61.4 | 15 × 12 | |
| 6 | 6 | 60 | 23.2* | 57.9 | 12 × 10 | |
| 7 | 6 | 50 | 24.5 | 56.4 | 8 × 7 | |
| 6 | 1 (test) | 3 | 30 | 20.1 | 45.8 | No |
| 2 | 6 | 50 | 24.6 | 49.4 | No | |
| 3 | 6 | 60 | 24.6 | 50.3 | No | |
| 4 | 6 | 70 | 24.6 | 52.7 | No | |
| 5 | 6 | 70 | 24.6 | 51.6 | No | |
| 7 | 1 (test) | 3 | 30 | 20.1 | NA§ | NA§ |
| 2 | 3 | 50 | 20.1 | |||
| 3 | 6 | 70 | 24.6 | |||
| 4 | 6 | 90 | 24.6 | |||
| 8 | 1 (test) | 3 | 30 | 20.1 | 43.9 | No |
| 2 | 6 | 60 | 24.6 | 48.0 | No | |
| 3 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 46.8 | No | |
| 4 | 6 | 60 | 24.6 | 49.1 | No | |
| 5 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 48.8 | 7 × 5 | |
| 6 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 51.9 | 5 × 2 | |
| 9 | 1 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.1 | 43.2 | No |
| 2 | 6 | 60 | 24.6 | 42.5 | No | |
| 3 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 42.7 | No | |
| 4 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 40.4 | No | |
| 5 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.1 | 42.7 | No | |
| 6 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 46.7 | No | |
| 10 | 1 (test) | 3 | 30 | 20.1 | 45.5 | No |
| 2 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.1 | 46.6 | No | |
| 3 (test) | 3 | 40 | 20.1 | 44.0 | No | |
| 4 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 54.4 | No | |
| 5 | 6 | 80 | 24.6 | 51.7 | 7 × 7 |
NA not available
* Sonication was prematurely terminated due to an incorrect excessive heating abort
† The quality of the thermometry data was too low for any valid temperature estimates
‡ During the first two sonications in this patient, the fat signal was not suppressed during RPFS thermometry. No valid thermometry data were acquired
§ Sonications were mainly located in the adipose tissue anterior of the tumour and no valid thermometry data were acquired
Fig. 2Magnitude images (grey scale) overlaid with MR thermometry data (colour-coded) during the seventh sonication in patient five; a 50-W sonication with a duration of 24.5 s. The maximum temperature reached during this sonication was 56.4 °C. Figures a–d and e–h show the coronal and sagittal images through the focal point, respectively, which were acquired with a temporal resolution of 2.25 s
Fig. 3Product of the duration (in seconds) and the applied power (in Watts) of the performed sonications (i.e. the applied energy) versus the increase in temperature (in °C) as measured with MR thermometry
Fig. 4Macroscopic (a) and microscopic pictures (b–d) of the surgical specimen of the fifth patient. (a) The yellow tissue is adipose tissue and the white tissue is the tumour tissue. The red-brown area inside the tumour indicates the presence of a haemorrhagic area which is caused by MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) ablation. (b–d) Haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stainings with increasing magnification. The blue line delineates the invasive tumour which is surrounded by normal fibroglandular tissue and adipose tissue. The area of tumour necrosis is encircled by a black line
An overview of the sonications, locations and tumour necrosis for all patients
| Patient | Sonication | Location | Tumour necrosis (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1–2 | 1.1 | No |
| 2 | 1–2 | 2.1 | 3 × 1 |
| 3–6 | 2.2 | 7 × 3 | |
| 3 | 1 | 3.1 | 5 × 2 |
| 2 | 3.2 | 6 × 4* | |
| 4 | 1–4 | 4.1 | NA† |
| 5 | 1–3 | 5.1 | 7 × 6 |
| 4–7‡ | 5.2 | 10 × 5 | |
| 6 | 1–5 | 6.1 | 11 × 7§ |
| 7 | 1–4 | 7.1 | Noǁ |
| 8 | 1–3 | 8.1 | 8 × 3 |
| 4 | 8.2 | 4 × 3 | |
| 5 | 8.3 | 9 × 5 | |
| 6 | 8.4 | 7 × 4 | |
| 9 | 1–3 | 9.1 | Noǁ |
| 4 | 9.2 | Noǁ | |
| 5–6 | 9.3 | Noǁ | |
| 10 | 1–4 | 10.1 | 9 × 4 |
| 5 | 10.2 | 7 × 3 |
NA not available
* The thermal damage is for the major part present in the glandular tissue outside the tumour due to movement of the patient after the test sonication
† No pathology results available
‡ Treatment cells were positioned next to each other and not exactly at the same location
§ Two other small areas of tumour necrosis were observed
ǁ No necrosis was observed inside the tumour; however, fat cell necrosis was observed in the adipose tissue surrounding the tumour
Fig. 5Product of the duration (in seconds) and the applied power (in Watts) of the performed sonications (i.e. the applied energy) versus the size of tumour necrosis (in mm2) at histopathology