Cargando…

Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND: Microwave ablation (MWA) is a standard percutaneous local therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Next-generation MWA is reported to create a more spherical ablation zone than radiofrequency ablation (RFA). We compared the ablation zone and aspect ratio of two 2.45 GHz MWA ablation p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ishikawa, Toru, Hasegawa, Iori, Hirosawa, Hiroshi, Honmou, Tsubasa, Sakai, Nobuyuki, Igarashi, Takanori, Yamazaki, Shun, Kobayashi, Takamasa, Sato, Toshifumi, Iwanaga, Akito, Sano, Tomoe, Yokoyama, Junji, Honma, Terasu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10292608/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37377842
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S412642
_version_ 1785062852253450240
author Ishikawa, Toru
Hasegawa, Iori
Hirosawa, Hiroshi
Honmou, Tsubasa
Sakai, Nobuyuki
Igarashi, Takanori
Yamazaki, Shun
Kobayashi, Takamasa
Sato, Toshifumi
Iwanaga, Akito
Sano, Tomoe
Yokoyama, Junji
Honma, Terasu
author_facet Ishikawa, Toru
Hasegawa, Iori
Hirosawa, Hiroshi
Honmou, Tsubasa
Sakai, Nobuyuki
Igarashi, Takanori
Yamazaki, Shun
Kobayashi, Takamasa
Sato, Toshifumi
Iwanaga, Akito
Sano, Tomoe
Yokoyama, Junji
Honma, Terasu
author_sort Ishikawa, Toru
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Microwave ablation (MWA) is a standard percutaneous local therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Next-generation MWA is reported to create a more spherical ablation zone than radiofrequency ablation (RFA). We compared the ablation zone and aspect ratio of two 2.45 GHz MWA ablation probes; Emprint(®) (13G) and Mimapro(®) (17G). We compared the ablation zone to the applied energy after MWA in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Furthermore, we investigated local recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 20 patients with HCC, with an average tumour diameter of 33.2 ± 12.2 mm, who underwent MWA using Emprint(®), and 9 patients who underwent MWA using Mimapro(®) with an average tumour diameter of 31.1 ± 10.5 mm. Both groups underwent the same ablation protocol using the same power settings. The images obtained after MWA showed the treatment ablation zone and aspect ratio, which were measured and compared using three-dimensional image analysis software. RESULTS: The aspect ratios in the Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) groups were 0.786 ± 0.105 and 0.808 ± 0.122, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.604). The ablation time was significantly shorter in the Mimapro(®) group than in the Emprint(®) group, and there was no significant difference in the frequency of popping or the ablation volume. There were no significant differences in local recurrence between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the aspect ratios of the ablation diameter, and the ablation zone was almost spherical in both cases. Mimapro(®) at 17G was less invasive than Emprint(®) at 13G.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10292608
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102926082023-06-27 Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study Ishikawa, Toru Hasegawa, Iori Hirosawa, Hiroshi Honmou, Tsubasa Sakai, Nobuyuki Igarashi, Takanori Yamazaki, Shun Kobayashi, Takamasa Sato, Toshifumi Iwanaga, Akito Sano, Tomoe Yokoyama, Junji Honma, Terasu J Hepatocell Carcinoma Short Report BACKGROUND: Microwave ablation (MWA) is a standard percutaneous local therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Next-generation MWA is reported to create a more spherical ablation zone than radiofrequency ablation (RFA). We compared the ablation zone and aspect ratio of two 2.45 GHz MWA ablation probes; Emprint(®) (13G) and Mimapro(®) (17G). We compared the ablation zone to the applied energy after MWA in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Furthermore, we investigated local recurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 20 patients with HCC, with an average tumour diameter of 33.2 ± 12.2 mm, who underwent MWA using Emprint(®), and 9 patients who underwent MWA using Mimapro(®) with an average tumour diameter of 31.1 ± 10.5 mm. Both groups underwent the same ablation protocol using the same power settings. The images obtained after MWA showed the treatment ablation zone and aspect ratio, which were measured and compared using three-dimensional image analysis software. RESULTS: The aspect ratios in the Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) groups were 0.786 ± 0.105 and 0.808 ± 0.122, respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.604). The ablation time was significantly shorter in the Mimapro(®) group than in the Emprint(®) group, and there was no significant difference in the frequency of popping or the ablation volume. There were no significant differences in local recurrence between the two groups. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the aspect ratios of the ablation diameter, and the ablation zone was almost spherical in both cases. Mimapro(®) at 17G was less invasive than Emprint(®) at 13G. Dove 2023-06-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10292608/ /pubmed/37377842 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S412642 Text en © 2023 Ishikawa et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Short Report
Ishikawa, Toru
Hasegawa, Iori
Hirosawa, Hiroshi
Honmou, Tsubasa
Sakai, Nobuyuki
Igarashi, Takanori
Yamazaki, Shun
Kobayashi, Takamasa
Sato, Toshifumi
Iwanaga, Akito
Sano, Tomoe
Yokoyama, Junji
Honma, Terasu
Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study
title Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study
title_full Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study
title_fullStr Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study
title_short Comparison of Ablation Volume Between Emprint(®) and Mimapro(®) Systems for Hepatocellular Carcinoma –A Preliminary Study
title_sort comparison of ablation volume between emprint(®) and mimapro(®) systems for hepatocellular carcinoma –a preliminary study
topic Short Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10292608/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37377842
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JHC.S412642
work_keys_str_mv AT ishikawatoru comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT hasegawaiori comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT hirosawahiroshi comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT honmoutsubasa comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT sakainobuyuki comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT igarashitakanori comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT yamazakishun comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT kobayashitakamasa comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT satotoshifumi comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT iwanagaakito comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT sanotomoe comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT yokoyamajunji comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy
AT honmaterasu comparisonofablationvolumebetweenemprintandmimaprosystemsforhepatocellularcarcinomaapreliminarystudy