| Literature DB >> 29318194 |
Jiangwei Liu1, Yan Liu1, Jianzhao Huang1, Lei Huang1, Pengwei Zhao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study compared the realtime monitoring effects of conventional ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) on evaluating radio frequency ablation (RFA) in a living swine liver model.Entities:
Keywords: ablation technique; animal experiment; conventional ultrasound; liver cancer
Year: 2017 PMID: 29318194 PMCID: PMC5757354 DOI: 10.1515/med-2017-0066
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Open Med (Wars)
Figure 1Flowchart of the experimental design of this study.
Comparisons of the areas and number of ablation lesions between genders based on the three different measurement methods.
| Male (n=6) | Female (n=4) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Area (cm2) | |||
| Conventional | 7.35 ± 1.58 | 7.32 ± 1.56 | 0.15 |
| CEUS | 7.61 ± 1.62 | 7.58 ± 1.60 | 0.18 |
| Gross sample | 7.63 ± 1.59 | 7.62 ± 1.58 | 0.12 |
| Amount | 24 | 19 | 0.41 |
Figure 2Representative images of conventional ultrasound (CU), contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), and the histologically stained liver lesions. 1: The ablation lesion presents an inhomogeneous hyperechoic mass according to CU (indicated by the white arrow); 2: the gross image of the radio frequency ablation (RFA) lesions of the swine livers in vitro; 3: coagulative necrotic hepatocytes inside a complete ablation lesion (indicated by the white arrow); 4: edema (indicated by the white arrow) and pyknosis of hepatocytes inside an incomplete ablation lesion; 5: reactive hyperemia zone between the ablation lesion and normal hepatic tissue (indicated by the white arrow); and 6: mass-like echo enhancement of an incomplete ablation lesion in the arterial phase according to CEUS (indicated by the white arrow).
Measurement values of the lesion ranges based on three methods ( ±s)
| Method | Horizontal diameter (cm) | Vertical diameter (cm) | Area (cm2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conventional | 3.27 ± 0.51 | 2.81 ± 0.50 | 7.20 ± 1.59 |
| CEUS | 3.36 ± 0.57 | 2.90 ± 0.55 | 7.60 ± 1.65 |
| Gross sample | 3.40 ± 0.60 | 2.88 ± 0.55 | 7.66 ± 1.79 |
CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound.
P<0.05 vs. the gross sample
Pearson correlation analyses of the ablation lesion areas as measured by the three methods.
| Method | Horizontal diameter (cm) | Vertical diameter (cm) | Area (cm2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gross/conventional | 0.977 | 0.943 | 0.956 |
| Gross/CEUS | 0.949 | 0.958 | 0.919 |
| Conventional/CEUS | 0.922 | 0.907 | 0.853 |
Gross, gross sample. CEUS, contrast-enhanced ultrasound
Comparison of the judgment of ablation lesion completeness between contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and histopathology.
| CEUS | Histopathology | |
|---|---|---|
| Residual | 28 | 30 |
| Non-residual | 15 | 13 |
| Total | 43 | 43 |