Literature DB >> 27036574

Physical modeling of microwave ablation zone clinical margin variance.

Garron Deshazer1, Derek Merck1, Mark Hagmann2, Damian E Dupuy1, Punit Prakash3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to measure through simulation the impact of (1) heterogeneity of biophysical parameters in tumor vs healthy tissue, (2) applicator placement relative to the tumor, and (3) proximity to large blood vessels on microwave ablation (MWA) treatment effect area. This will help identify the biophysical properties that have the greatest impact on improving clinical modeling of MWA procedures.
METHODS: The authors' approach was to develop two-compartment models with variable tissue properties and simulate MWA procedures performed in liver with Perseon Medical's 915 MHz short-tip applicator. Input parameters for the dielectric and thermal properties considered in this study were based on measurements for healthy and malignant (primary or metastatic) liver tissue previously reported in the literature. Compartment 1 (C1) represented normal, fatty, or cirrhotic liver, and compartment 2 (C2) represented a primary hepatocellular carcinoma tumor sample embedded within C1. To evaluate the sensitivity to tissue parameters, a range of clinically relevant tissue properties were simulated. To evaluate the impact of MWA antenna position, the authors simulated various tumor perfusion models with the antenna shifted 5 mm anteriorly and posteriorly. To evaluate the effect of local vasculature, the authors simulated an additional heat sink of various diameters and distances from the tumor. Dice coefficient statistics were used to evaluate ablation zone effects from these local heat sinks.
RESULTS: Models showed less than 11% of volume variability (1 cm(3) increase) in ablation treatment effect region when accounting for the difference in relative permittivity and electrical conductivity between malignant and healthy liver tissue. There was a 27% increase in volume when simulating thermal conductivity of fatty liver disease versus the baseline simulation. The ablation zone volume increased more than 36% when simulating cirrhotic surrounding liver tissue. Antenna placement relative to the tumor had minimal sensitivity to the absolute size of the treatment effect area, with less than 1.5 mm variation. However, when considering the overlap between the ablation zone and the ideal clinical margin when the antenna was displaced 5 mm anteriorly and posteriorly, there was approximately a 6 mm difference in the margins. Dice coefficient statistics showed as much as an 11% decrease in the ablation margin due to the presence of vessel heat sinks within the model.
CONCLUSIONS: The results from simulating the variance in malignant tissue thermal and electrical properties will help guide better approximations for MWA treatments. The results suggest that assuming malignant and healthy liver tissues have similar dielectric properties is a reasonable first approximation. Antenna placement relative to the tumor has minimal impact on the absolute size of the ablation zone, yet it does cause relevant variation between desired treatment margin and ablation zone. Blood vessel cooling, especially hepatic vessels close to the region of interest, may be a significant factor to consider in treatment planning. Further data need to be collected for assessing treatment planning utility of modeling MWA in this context.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27036574     DOI: 10.1118/1.4942980

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


  8 in total

1.  Experimental measurement of microwave ablation heating pattern and comparison to computer simulations.

Authors:  Garron Deshazer; Punit Prakash; Derek Merck; Dieter Haemmerich
Journal:  Int J Hyperthermia       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 3.914

2.  Fully laparoscopic thermo-ablation of liver malignancies with or without liver resection: tumor location is an independent local recurrence risk factor.

Authors:  Geoffrey Ledoux; Koceila Amroun; Rami Rhaiem; Audrey Cagniet; Arman Aghaei; Olivier Bouche; Christine Hoeffel; Daniele Sommacale; Tullio Piardi; Reza Kianmanesh
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-02-19       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Theoretical model for laser ablation outcome predictions in brain: calibration and validation on clinical MR thermometry images.

Authors:  Samuel John Fahrenholtz; Reza Madankan; Shabbar Danish; John D Hazle; R Jason Stafford; David Fuentes
Journal:  Int J Hyperthermia       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 3.914

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

5.  Microwave ablation of lung tumors: A probabilistic approach for simulation-based treatment planning.

Authors:  Jan Sebek; Pinyo Taeprasartsit; Henky Wibowo; Warren L Beard; Radoslav Bortel; Punit Prakash
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 4.506

6.  The relationship between applied energy and ablation zone volume in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal liver metastasis.

Authors:  Wouter J Heerink; A Millad Solouki; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Simeon J S Ruiter; Egbert Sieders; Matthijs Oudkerk; Koert P de Jong
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  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

8.  Fat Quantification Imaging and Biophysical Modeling for Patient-Specific Forecasting of Microwave Ablation Therapy.

Authors:  Frankangel Servin; Jarrod A Collins; Jon S Heiselman; Katherine C Frederick-Dyer; Virginia B Planz; Sunil K Geevarghese; Daniel B Brown; Michael I Miga
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 4.566

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.