Jason Chiang1, Michael Loecher2, Kevin Moulin2, M Franca Meloni3, Steven S Raman4, Justin P McWilliams4, Daniel B Ennis2, Edward W Lee4. 1. Department of Radiology, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA 90095. Electronic address: cjchiang@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 3. Department of Interventional Ultrasound, Casa di Cura Igea, Milan, Italy. 4. Department of Radiology, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, 757 Westwood Plaza, Suite 1638, Los Angeles, CA 90095.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To characterize the effect of hepatic vessel flow using 4-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and correlate their effect on microwave ablation volumes in an in vivo non-cirrhotic porcine liver model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Microwave ablation antennas were placed under ultrasound guidance in each liver lobe of swine (n = 3 in each animal) for a total of 9 ablations. Pre- and post-ablation 4D flow MR imaging was acquired to quantify flow changes in the hepatic vasculature. Flow measurements, along with encompassed vessel size and vessel-antenna spacing, were then correlated with final ablation volume from segmented MR images. RESULTS: The linear regression model demonstrated that the preablation measurement of encompassed hepatic vein size (β = -0.80 ± 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.15 to -0.22; P = .02) was significantly correlated to final ablation zone volume. The addition of hepatic vein flow rate found via 4D flow MRI (β = -0.83 ± 0.65, 95% CI -2.50 to 0.84; P = .26), and distance from antenna to hepatic vein (β = 0.26 ± 0.26, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.92; P = .36) improved the model accuracy but not significantly so (multivariate adjusted R2 = 0.70 vs univariate (vessel size) adjusted R2 = 0.63, P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic vein size in an encompassed ablation zone was found to be significantly correlated with final ablation zone volume. Although the univariate 4D flow MR imaging-acquired measurements alone were not found to be statistically significant, its addition to hepatic vein size improved the accuracy of the ablation volume regression model. Pre-ablation 4D flow MR imaging of the liver may assist in prospectively optimizing thermal ablation treatment.
PURPOSE: To characterize the effect of hepatic vessel flow using 4-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and correlate their effect on microwave ablation volumes in an in vivo non-cirrhotic porcine liver model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Microwave ablation antennas were placed under ultrasound guidance in each liver lobe of swine (n = 3 in each animal) for a total of 9 ablations. Pre- and post-ablation 4D flow MR imaging was acquired to quantify flow changes in the hepatic vasculature. Flow measurements, along with encompassed vessel size and vessel-antenna spacing, were then correlated with final ablation volume from segmented MR images. RESULTS: The linear regression model demonstrated that the preablation measurement of encompassed hepatic vein size (β = -0.80 ± 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.15 to -0.22; P = .02) was significantly correlated to final ablation zone volume. The addition of hepatic vein flow rate found via 4D flow MRI (β = -0.83 ± 0.65, 95% CI -2.50 to 0.84; P = .26), and distance from antenna to hepatic vein (β = 0.26 ± 0.26, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.92; P = .36) improved the model accuracy but not significantly so (multivariate adjusted R2 = 0.70 vs univariate (vessel size) adjusted R2 = 0.63, P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic vein size in an encompassed ablation zone was found to be significantly correlated with final ablation zone volume. Although the univariate 4D flow MR imaging-acquired measurements alone were not found to be statistically significant, its addition to hepatic vein size improved the accuracy of the ablation volume regression model. Pre-ablation 4D flow MR imaging of the liver may assist in prospectively optimizing thermal ablation treatment.
Authors: David S K Lu; Steven S Raman; Darko J Vodopich; Michael Wang; James Sayre; Charles Lassman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Thomas Cuisset; Christophe Beauloye; Narbeh Melikian; Michalis Hamilos; Jaydeep Sarma; Giovanna Sarno; Maria Naslund; Leif Smith; Frans Van de Vosse; Nico H J Pijls; Bernard De Bruyne Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2009-02-01 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Nam C Yu; Steven S Raman; Young Jun Kim; Charles Lassman; Xinlian Chang; David S K Lu Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2008-05-27 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Jason Chiang; Bridgett J Willey; Alejandro Muñoz Del Rio; J Louis Hinshaw; Fred T Lee; Christopher L Brace Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2014-09-23 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Alex Frydrychowicz; Eric Niespodzany; Ben R Landgraf; Kevin M Johnson; Oliver Wieben; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2012-11-12 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Benjamin R Landgraf; Kevin M Johnson; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Christopher J Francois; Oliver Wieben; Scott B Reeder Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2013-11-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Christopher J Francois; Oliver Wieben; Scott B Reeder Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Thekla H Oechtering; Grant S Roberts; Nikolaos Panagiotopoulos; Oliver Wieben; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Scott B Reeder Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-11-27