In vivo percutaneous microwave ablation with ECO system in swine kidney and liver: comparison of ablation-zone size to manufacturer predictions and assessment of new antenna design
{"title":"In vivo percutaneous microwave ablation with ECO system in swine kidney and liver: comparison of ablation-zone size to manufacturer predictions and assessment of new antenna design","authors":"Théo Bonnefoy , Georges Tarris , Kévin Guillen , Olivia Poupardin , Olivier Chevallier , Ludwig Serge Aho Glele , Jean-Michel Correas , Romaric Loffroy","doi":"10.1016/j.redii.2025.100061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>Percutaneous microwave ablation is an effective and minimally invasive treatment for small tumors. To achieve local disease control, the entire tumor and a surrounding safety margin must be destroyed. Power and application time are chosen based on manufacturer-provided data, usually obtained from ex vivo animal models. However, ex vivo tissues differ from in vivo condition due to compositional changes and absence of heat dissipation by blood flow. This study aimed to compare in vivo ablation zone sizes in swine with those predicted by the device manufacturer.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Five pigs underwent 40 microwave ablation procedures using various power-time-organ combinations; 18 hepatic and 20 renal zones were evaluable. All procedures were performed with devices from a single manufacturer (ECO Microwave System Co, Nanjing, China). After euthanasia, the ablation zones were excised and sliced. For each ablation, the slice showing the largest dimensions was selected to measure x and y diameters and used to compute the ablated surface area.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>For seven of eight power-time-organ combinations, significant differences were found between predicted and measured surface areas (<em>p</em> < 0.05), with deviations ranging from –45 % to +54 %. The overall mean absolute differences between measured and predicted ablation sizes in the x and y dimensions and the ablation surface area were 7.6 ± 4.6 mm (28 % ± 19 %), 5.8 ± 4.3 mm (18 % ± 13 %) and 273 ± 210 mm² (39 % ± 34 %), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Manufacturer-provided predictive data for microwave ablation zone size may lack reliability. Intraoperative and postoperative monitoring of ablation zone size is crucial to ensure complete tumor destruction with adequate margins.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74676,"journal":{"name":"Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging","volume":"14 ","pages":"Article 100061"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772652525000043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim
Percutaneous microwave ablation is an effective and minimally invasive treatment for small tumors. To achieve local disease control, the entire tumor and a surrounding safety margin must be destroyed. Power and application time are chosen based on manufacturer-provided data, usually obtained from ex vivo animal models. However, ex vivo tissues differ from in vivo condition due to compositional changes and absence of heat dissipation by blood flow. This study aimed to compare in vivo ablation zone sizes in swine with those predicted by the device manufacturer.
Methods
Five pigs underwent 40 microwave ablation procedures using various power-time-organ combinations; 18 hepatic and 20 renal zones were evaluable. All procedures were performed with devices from a single manufacturer (ECO Microwave System Co, Nanjing, China). After euthanasia, the ablation zones were excised and sliced. For each ablation, the slice showing the largest dimensions was selected to measure x and y diameters and used to compute the ablated surface area.
Results
For seven of eight power-time-organ combinations, significant differences were found between predicted and measured surface areas (p < 0.05), with deviations ranging from –45 % to +54 %. The overall mean absolute differences between measured and predicted ablation sizes in the x and y dimensions and the ablation surface area were 7.6 ± 4.6 mm (28 % ± 19 %), 5.8 ± 4.3 mm (18 % ± 13 %) and 273 ± 210 mm² (39 % ± 34 %), respectively.
Conclusion
Manufacturer-provided predictive data for microwave ablation zone size may lack reliability. Intraoperative and postoperative monitoring of ablation zone size is crucial to ensure complete tumor destruction with adequate margins.