Sabrina Q R Liew, Nathaniel Rex, Celina Hsieh, Hyeonseon Kim, Scott A Collins, Grayson L Baird, DaeHee Kim, Aaron W P Maxwell
{"title":"一种用于优化肝脏肿瘤微波消融参数的自动化软件算法。","authors":"Sabrina Q R Liew, Nathaniel Rex, Celina Hsieh, Hyeonseon Kim, Scott A Collins, Grayson L Baird, DaeHee Kim, Aaron W P Maxwell","doi":"10.1080/02656736.2025.2473391","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the performance of a software algorithm developed to streamline microwave liver ablation parameter selection and to compare performance of this algorithm to that of experienced interventional radiologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent microwave ablation for treatment of liver tumors were retrospectively identified. An automated software platform was developed to select the top three 'best fit' combinations of microwave ablation power, time, and vendor for a given tumor to achieve a 5 mm minimal ablative margin (MAM). Generalized linear modeling was used to compare the performance of the software algorithm and experienced interventional radiologists with respect to selected ablation parameters and estimates of total ablative volume (TAV) and MAM. Statistical significance was set at <i>p</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35 patients were identified who underwent single-antenna microwave ablation for liver tumors. Mean estimated TAV was not significantly different between clinical practice (24.96 cm<sup>3</sup>, 95% CI: 21.18 - 28.75 cm<sup>3</sup>) and algorithm-derived parameters (23.89 cm<sup>3</sup>, 95% CI: 20.04 - 27.74 cm<sup>3</sup>; <i>p</i> > 0.05), indicating agreement in overall treatment approach. However, the algorithm consistently generated ablation parameter combinations with more favorable estimated MAM metrics and significantly lower variability (first algorithm: -5.33 mm, 95% CI -5.40 - -5.26 mm; second algorithm: -5.83 mm, 95% CI -6.01 - -5.65 mm; third algorithm: -6.06 mm, 95% CI -6.30 - -5.83 mm) compared to interventional radiologists (-1.02 mm, 95% CI -2.02 - -0.03 mm).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Streamlining microwave liver ablation parameter selection using an automated software algorithm reduces variability and improves estimated MAM coverage of liver tumors.</p>","PeriodicalId":14137,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Hyperthermia","volume":"42 1","pages":"2473391"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An automated software algorithm for optimizing microwave ablation parameters for treatment of liver tumors.\",\"authors\":\"Sabrina Q R Liew, Nathaniel Rex, Celina Hsieh, Hyeonseon Kim, Scott A Collins, Grayson L Baird, DaeHee Kim, Aaron W P Maxwell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02656736.2025.2473391\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the performance of a software algorithm developed to streamline microwave liver ablation parameter selection and to compare performance of this algorithm to that of experienced interventional radiologists.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent microwave ablation for treatment of liver tumors were retrospectively identified. An automated software platform was developed to select the top three 'best fit' combinations of microwave ablation power, time, and vendor for a given tumor to achieve a 5 mm minimal ablative margin (MAM). Generalized linear modeling was used to compare the performance of the software algorithm and experienced interventional radiologists with respect to selected ablation parameters and estimates of total ablative volume (TAV) and MAM. Statistical significance was set at <i>p</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>35 patients were identified who underwent single-antenna microwave ablation for liver tumors. Mean estimated TAV was not significantly different between clinical practice (24.96 cm<sup>3</sup>, 95% CI: 21.18 - 28.75 cm<sup>3</sup>) and algorithm-derived parameters (23.89 cm<sup>3</sup>, 95% CI: 20.04 - 27.74 cm<sup>3</sup>; <i>p</i> > 0.05), indicating agreement in overall treatment approach. However, the algorithm consistently generated ablation parameter combinations with more favorable estimated MAM metrics and significantly lower variability (first algorithm: -5.33 mm, 95% CI -5.40 - -5.26 mm; second algorithm: -5.83 mm, 95% CI -6.01 - -5.65 mm; third algorithm: -6.06 mm, 95% CI -6.30 - -5.83 mm) compared to interventional radiologists (-1.02 mm, 95% CI -2.02 - -0.03 mm).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Streamlining microwave liver ablation parameter selection using an automated software algorithm reduces variability and improves estimated MAM coverage of liver tumors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14137,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Hyperthermia\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"2473391\"},\"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\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2025.2473391\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Hyperthermia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2025.2473391","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:评价一种简化微波肝消融参数选择的软件算法的性能,并将该算法的性能与经验丰富的介入放射科医生的性能进行比较。方法:回顾性分析采用微波消融术治疗肝脏肿瘤的病例。开发了一个自动化软件平台,为给定肿瘤选择微波消融功率、时间和供应商的前三种“最适合”组合,以实现5mm的最小消融边界(MAM)。使用广义线性模型比较软件算法和经验丰富的介入放射科医生在选择消融参数和估计总消融体积(TAV)和MAM方面的表现。结果:35例患者行肝肿瘤单天线微波消融治疗。平均估计TAV在临床实践(24.96 cm3, 95% CI: 21.18 - 28.75 cm3)和算法推导参数(23.89 cm3, 95% CI: 20.04 - 27.74 cm3;P < 0.05),说明整体治疗方法一致。然而,该算法始终生成的消融参数组合具有更有利的估计MAM指标和显着更低的变异性(第一种算法:-5.33 mm, 95% CI -5.40 - -5.26 mm;第二算法:-5.83 mm, 95% CI -6.01 - -5.65 mm;第三种算法:-6.06 mm, 95% CI -6.30 - -5.83 mm),而介入放射科医生(-1.02 mm, 95% CI -2.02 - -0.03 mm)。结论:使用自动化软件算法简化微波肝消融参数的选择,减少了可变性,提高了肝肿瘤的估计MAM覆盖率。
An automated software algorithm for optimizing microwave ablation parameters for treatment of liver tumors.
Purpose: To evaluate the performance of a software algorithm developed to streamline microwave liver ablation parameter selection and to compare performance of this algorithm to that of experienced interventional radiologists.
Methods: Patients who underwent microwave ablation for treatment of liver tumors were retrospectively identified. An automated software platform was developed to select the top three 'best fit' combinations of microwave ablation power, time, and vendor for a given tumor to achieve a 5 mm minimal ablative margin (MAM). Generalized linear modeling was used to compare the performance of the software algorithm and experienced interventional radiologists with respect to selected ablation parameters and estimates of total ablative volume (TAV) and MAM. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results: 35 patients were identified who underwent single-antenna microwave ablation for liver tumors. Mean estimated TAV was not significantly different between clinical practice (24.96 cm3, 95% CI: 21.18 - 28.75 cm3) and algorithm-derived parameters (23.89 cm3, 95% CI: 20.04 - 27.74 cm3; p > 0.05), indicating agreement in overall treatment approach. However, the algorithm consistently generated ablation parameter combinations with more favorable estimated MAM metrics and significantly lower variability (first algorithm: -5.33 mm, 95% CI -5.40 - -5.26 mm; second algorithm: -5.83 mm, 95% CI -6.01 - -5.65 mm; third algorithm: -6.06 mm, 95% CI -6.30 - -5.83 mm) compared to interventional radiologists (-1.02 mm, 95% CI -2.02 - -0.03 mm).
Conclusion: Streamlining microwave liver ablation parameter selection using an automated software algorithm reduces variability and improves estimated MAM coverage of liver tumors.