C Marcelin1, J Leiner2, A Nasri2, F Petitpierre3, Y Le Bras3, M Yacoub2, N Grenier3, J C Bernhard4, F Cornelis5. 1. Service d'imagerie diagnostique et thérapeutique de l'adulte, hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux, France. Electronic address: clement.marcelin@gmail.com. 2. Service d'anatomopathologie, hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux, France. 3. Service d'imagerie diagnostique et thérapeutique de l'adulte, hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux, France. 4. Service de chirurgie urologique, hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux, France. 5. Service d'imagerie diagnostique et thérapeutique de l'adulte, hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, 33076 Bordeaux, France; Service de radiologie, hôpital Tenon, AP-HP, 4, rue de la Chine, 75020 Paris, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare diameters of in vivo microwave ablation (MWA) performed in swine kidneys with ex vivo diameters, and to correlate with ablation work (AW), a new metric reflecting total energy delivered. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighteen in vivo MWA were performed in 6 swine kidneys successively using one or two antennas (MicroThermX®). Ablation consisted in delivering power (45-120W) for 5-15minutes. Ex vivo diameters were provided by the vendors and obtained on bovine liver tissue. AW was defined as the sum of (power)*(time)*(number of antennas) for all phases of an ablation (in kJoules). Kidneys were removed laparoscopically immediately after ablation. After sacrifice, ablations zones were evaluated macroscopically, and maximum diameters of the zones were recorded. Wilcoxon sum rank test and Pearson's correlation were used for comparisons. RESULTS: For a single antenna (n=12), the in vivo diameters ranged from 12 to 35mm, and 15-49mm for 2 antennas (n=6). The in vivo diameters remained shorter than ex vivo diameters by 8.6%±30.1 on 1 antenna and 11.7%±26.5 on 2 antennas (P=0.31 and 0.44, respectively). AW ranged from 13.5 to 108kJ. Diameters increased linearly with AW both with 1 and 2 antennas, but only moderate correlations were observed (r=0.43 [95% confidence interval: -0.19; 0.81], P=0.16; and 0.57 [-0.44; 0.95], P=0.24, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although diameters after in vivo renal MWA increased linearly with AW, the moderate correlation and wide standard deviations observed may justify a careful imaging monitoring during treatment delivery and settings adaptation, if needed, for optimal ablation.
PURPOSE: To compare diameters of in vivo microwave ablation (MWA) performed in swine kidneys with ex vivo diameters, and to correlate with ablation work (AW), a new metric reflecting total energy delivered. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Eighteen in vivo MWA were performed in 6 swine kidneys successively using one or two antennas (MicroThermX®). Ablation consisted in delivering power (45-120W) for 5-15minutes. Ex vivo diameters were provided by the vendors and obtained on bovine liver tissue. AW was defined as the sum of (power)*(time)*(number of antennas) for all phases of an ablation (in kJoules). Kidneys were removed laparoscopically immediately after ablation. After sacrifice, ablations zones were evaluated macroscopically, and maximum diameters of the zones were recorded. Wilcoxon sum rank test and Pearson's correlation were used for comparisons. RESULTS: For a single antenna (n=12), the in vivo diameters ranged from 12 to 35mm, and 15-49mm for 2 antennas (n=6). The in vivo diameters remained shorter than ex vivo diameters by 8.6%±30.1 on 1 antenna and 11.7%±26.5 on 2 antennas (P=0.31 and 0.44, respectively). AW ranged from 13.5 to 108kJ. Diameters increased linearly with AW both with 1 and 2 antennas, but only moderate correlations were observed (r=0.43 [95% confidence interval: -0.19; 0.81], P=0.16; and 0.57 [-0.44; 0.95], P=0.24, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although diameters after in vivo renal MWA increased linearly with AW, the moderate correlation and wide standard deviations observed may justify a careful imaging monitoring during treatment delivery and settings adaptation, if needed, for optimal ablation.