A preliminary comparative study of three different microwave ablation methods for cystic-solid thyroid nodules.

IF 3
Xiang-Rong Xie, Yu-Fan Wu, Geng-Biao Zhang, Dong-Ming Guo, Chuang-Yu Ma, Wei-Jian Luo, Jin-Mei Pan, Yan-Ping Wu, Hong-Hui Su
{"title":"A preliminary comparative study of three different microwave ablation methods for cystic-solid thyroid nodules.","authors":"Xiang-Rong Xie, Yu-Fan Wu, Geng-Biao Zhang, Dong-Ming Guo, Chuang-Yu Ma, Wei-Jian Luo, Jin-Mei Pan, Yan-Ping Wu, Hong-Hui Su","doi":"10.1080/02656736.2025.2557954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This preliminary comparative study assessed the effectiveness of three microwave ablation (MWA) techniques in managing cystic-solid thyroid nodules.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent MWA from January 2018 to October 2021 at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College were divided into three groups: Simple Aspiration Group (SAG) (cyst fluid drained before direct ablation), Epinephrine Solution Immersion Group (ESIG) (cyst fluid drained followed by soaking in epinephrine), and High-Power Ablation Group (HPAG) (immediate high-power ablation after drainage). Twenty patients were retrospectively analyzed in each group, comparing intraoperative intracapsular bleeding, ablation time of cystic-solid nodules, 12th-month nodule volume reduction rate (VRR), preoperative cosmetic and symptom scores, and postoperative scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences were observed in intraoperative intracapsular rebleeding (≥50% cyst cavity volume) between ESIG and SAG (<i>p</i> = 0.029) and HPAG and SAG (<i>p</i> = 0.008), but not between ESIG and HPAG (<i>p</i> = 0.602). The ablation time for cystic-solid nodules was shorter in ESIG and HPAG compared to SAG (<i>p</i> = 0.003 and <i>p</i> = 0.006, respectively), with no significant difference between ESIG and HPAG (<i>p</i> = 0.689). However, the 12th-month outcomes-VRRs, symptom scores, and cosmetic scores-showed no statistical significance among the groups (<i>p</i> = 0.634, <i>p</i> = 0.329, and <i>p</i> = 0.717, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ESIG and HPAG significantly reduced intraoperative intracapsular bleeding and ablation time of solid-cystic nodules compared with SAG, indicating enhanced procedural efficiency. Nevertheless, the long-term therapeutic outcomes (nodule shrinkage, symptom relief, and cosmesis) were similar across all methods. These findings underscore the potential of epinephrine immersion and high-power ablation in optimizing MWA for cystic-solid nodules.</p>","PeriodicalId":520653,"journal":{"name":"International journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group","volume":"42 1","pages":"2557954"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of hyperthermia : the official journal of European Society for Hyperthermic Oncology, North American Hyperthermia Group","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2025.2557954","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This preliminary comparative study assessed the effectiveness of three microwave ablation (MWA) techniques in managing cystic-solid thyroid nodules.

Methods: Patients who underwent MWA from January 2018 to October 2021 at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College were divided into three groups: Simple Aspiration Group (SAG) (cyst fluid drained before direct ablation), Epinephrine Solution Immersion Group (ESIG) (cyst fluid drained followed by soaking in epinephrine), and High-Power Ablation Group (HPAG) (immediate high-power ablation after drainage). Twenty patients were retrospectively analyzed in each group, comparing intraoperative intracapsular bleeding, ablation time of cystic-solid nodules, 12th-month nodule volume reduction rate (VRR), preoperative cosmetic and symptom scores, and postoperative scores.

Results: Significant differences were observed in intraoperative intracapsular rebleeding (≥50% cyst cavity volume) between ESIG and SAG (p = 0.029) and HPAG and SAG (p = 0.008), but not between ESIG and HPAG (p = 0.602). The ablation time for cystic-solid nodules was shorter in ESIG and HPAG compared to SAG (p = 0.003 and p = 0.006, respectively), with no significant difference between ESIG and HPAG (p = 0.689). However, the 12th-month outcomes-VRRs, symptom scores, and cosmetic scores-showed no statistical significance among the groups (p = 0.634, p = 0.329, and p = 0.717, respectively).

Conclusion: ESIG and HPAG significantly reduced intraoperative intracapsular bleeding and ablation time of solid-cystic nodules compared with SAG, indicating enhanced procedural efficiency. Nevertheless, the long-term therapeutic outcomes (nodule shrinkage, symptom relief, and cosmesis) were similar across all methods. These findings underscore the potential of epinephrine immersion and high-power ablation in optimizing MWA for cystic-solid nodules.

三种微波消融治疗囊性甲状腺结节的初步比较研究。
目的:对三种微波消融(MWA)技术治疗囊性甲状腺结节的有效性进行初步对比研究。方法:将2018年1月至2021年10月在汕头大学医学院第二附属医院行MWA的患者分为简单抽吸组(SAG)(直接消融前引流囊液)、肾上腺素溶液浸泡组(ESIG)(引流囊液后浸泡肾上腺素)和高功率消融组(HPAG)(引流后立即高功率消融)。回顾性分析每组20例患者,比较术中囊内出血、囊实性结节消融时间、12个月结节体积缩小率(VRR)、术前美容及症状评分、术后评分。结果:ESIG与SAG、HPAG与SAG术中囊内再出血(≥50%囊腔体积)差异有统计学意义(p = 0.029),而ESIG与HPAG无统计学意义(p = 0.602)。ESIG和HPAG对囊实性结节的消融时间较SAG短(p = 0.003和p = 0.006),而ESIG和HPAG之间无显著差异(p = 0.689)。然而,12个月的结果- vrr,症状评分和美容评分-组间无统计学意义(p = 0.634, p = 0.329和p = 0.717)。结论:与SAG相比,ESIG和HPAG可显著减少实性囊性结节术中出血和消融时间,提高手术效率。然而,所有方法的长期治疗结果(结节缩小、症状缓解和美容)相似。这些发现强调了肾上腺素浸泡和高功率消融在优化囊实性结节MWA中的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信