Hiroshi Kodama1, Eisuke Ueshima1, Song Gao1, Sebastien Monette2, Lee-Ronn Paluch3, Kreg Howk4, Joseph P Erinjeri1,5, Stephen B Solomon1,5, Govindarajan Srimathveeravalli1,4. 1. a Department of Radiology , Interventional Radiology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center , New York , NY , USA. 2. b Laboratory of Comparative Pathology , Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, The Rockefeller University, Weill Cornell Medicine , New York , NY , USA. 3. c Center of Comparative Medicine and Pathology , Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medicine, Hospital for Special Surgery , New York , NY , USA. 4. d Medtronic Inc , Massachusetts , MA , USA. 5. e Department of Radiology , Weill Cornell Medical College , New York , NY , USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of duration of energy delivery on adverse events (AEs) and heat sink effects during high power microwave ablation (MWA) of normal swine lung. MATERIALS AND METHODS: High power (100 W) MWA was performed with short (2 min, 18 ablations) or long (10 min, nine ablations) duration of energy delivery in unilateral lung of swine (n = 10). CT imaging was done prior to sacrifice at 2 or 28 d post-treatment, with additional imaging at 7 and 14 d for the latter cohort. Ablation zones were assessed with CT imaging and histopathology analysis. Differences in AEs and ablation characteristics between groups were compared with Fisher's exact test and Student's t-test, respectively. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in formation of air-filled needle tract, cavitation, and pneumonia (p > 0.5) between the treatment groups. Intra-procedural pneumothorax requiring chest tube placement occurred in three animals. Substantial (>20%, p = 0.01) intra-procedural ablation zone distortion was observed in both groups. The presence of large airways or blood vessels did not result in heat sink effect within the ablation zones and was not indicative of reduced ablation size. Increased energy delivery yielded larger (8.9 ± 3.1 cm3 vs. 3.4 ± 1.7 cm3, p < 0.001) spherical ablations (sphericity: 0.70 ± 0.10 vs. 0.56 ± 0.13, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: High power MWA of normal lung with longer duration of energy delivery can create larger spherical ablations, without significant differences in post-procedure AEs when compared with shorter energy delivery time.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of duration of energy delivery on adverse events (AEs) and heat sink effects during high power microwave ablation (MWA) of normal swine lung. MATERIALS AND METHODS: High power (100 W) MWA was performed with short (2 min, 18 ablations) or long (10 min, nine ablations) duration of energy delivery in unilateral lung of swine (n = 10). CT imaging was done prior to sacrifice at 2 or 28 d post-treatment, with additional imaging at 7 and 14 d for the latter cohort. Ablation zones were assessed with CT imaging and histopathology analysis. Differences in AEs and ablation characteristics between groups were compared with Fisher's exact test and Student's t-test, respectively. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in formation of air-filled needle tract, cavitation, and pneumonia (p > 0.5) between the treatment groups. Intra-procedural pneumothorax requiring chest tube placement occurred in three animals. Substantial (>20%, p = 0.01) intra-procedural ablation zone distortion was observed in both groups. The presence of large airways or blood vessels did not result in heat sink effect within the ablation zones and was not indicative of reduced ablation size. Increased energy delivery yielded larger (8.9 ± 3.1 cm3 vs. 3.4 ± 1.7 cm3, p < 0.001) spherical ablations (sphericity: 0.70 ± 0.10 vs. 0.56 ± 0.13, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: High power MWA of normal lung with longer duration of energy delivery can create larger spherical ablations, without significant differences in post-procedure AEs when compared with shorter energy delivery time.
Authors: Erik Velez; S Nahum Goldberg; Gaurav Kumar; Yuanguo Wang; Svetlana Gourevitch; Jacob Sosna; Tyler Moon; Christopher L Brace; Muneeb Ahmed Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-07-13 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mark W Little; Daniel Chung; Philip Boardman; Fergus V Gleeson; Ewan M Anderson Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2012-09-12 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Farrah J Wolf; David J Grand; Jason T Machan; Thomas A Dipetrillo; William W Mayo-Smith; Damian E Dupuy Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jan Sebek; Steve Kramer; Rob Rocha; Kun-Chang Yu; Radoslav Bortel; Warren L Beard; David S Biller; David S Hodgson; Charan K Ganta; Henky Wibowo; John Yee; Renelle Myers; Stephen Lam; Punit Prakash Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2020-10-13
Authors: Mario Ghosn; Ahmed S Elsakka; Fourat Ridouani; Raphael Doustaly; Louie Mingione; Kevin Royalty; Etay Ziv; Erica Alexander; Aaron Maxwell; Sebastien Monette; Hyun S Kim; Robert F Short; Alda Lui Tam; Robert D Suh; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res Date: 2022-02