Cargando…

EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model

Introduction  Two devices are currently available to perform pancreatic radiofrequency ablation (P-RFA). Potential clinical indications might extend from the treatment of pancreatic cystic lesions to ablation of small pancreatic solid lesions or cytoreduction of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barret, Maximilien, Leblanc, Sarah, Rouquette, Alexandre, Chaussade, Stanislas, Terris, Benoit, Prat, Frédéric
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6336466/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30705944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0668-5653
_version_ 1783388060890693632
author Barret, Maximilien
Leblanc, Sarah
Rouquette, Alexandre
Chaussade, Stanislas
Terris, Benoit
Prat, Frédéric
author_facet Barret, Maximilien
Leblanc, Sarah
Rouquette, Alexandre
Chaussade, Stanislas
Terris, Benoit
Prat, Frédéric
author_sort Barret, Maximilien
collection PubMed
description Introduction  Two devices are currently available to perform pancreatic radiofrequency ablation (P-RFA). Potential clinical indications might extend from the treatment of pancreatic cystic lesions to ablation of small pancreatic solid lesions or cytoreduction of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas, but more preclinical data from animal models are needed to optimize P-RFA operation. Methods  P-RFA was performed under laparotomy and under endoscopic ultrasonographic guidance on the liver and pancreatic parenchyma of four live swine using the Habib EUS RFA (EMcision Ltd, London, UK) probe and the EUS-RA needle (Taewoong Medical, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea). Animals were sacrificed 2 hours after the procedure. Influence of tuning ablation time and power on tissue ablation were studied by histopathological assessment of the maximal depth of tissue damage on representative slides for each P-RFA shot. Results  The Habib probe in the liver parenchyma resulted in tissue necrosis increasing within the range of 1.9 ± 0.5 mm (Power = 8 W, Time = 120 s) to 2.5 ± 1 mm (Power = 10 W, Time = 120 s). In the pancreatic parenchyma, tissue damage ranged from 3.1 ± 0.4 mm (Power = 8 W, Time = 120 s) to 2.3 ± 0.1 mm (12 W, 120 s) in depth. EUS RFA ablation of the liver parenchyma resulted in tissue damage ranging from 1.6 ± 0.2 mm (Power = 30 W, Time = 11 s) to 1.5 ± 0.1 mm (Power = 70 W, Time = 9 s); in the pancreas, ablation depth ranged from 3.6 ± 0.5 mm (Power = 30 W, Time = 15 s) to 3.8 ± 0.4 mm (Power = 70 W, Time = 11 s). Conclusion  Both devices allow for effective ablation of pancreatic tissue within 1.5 to 3.8 mm around the RFA electrode, with a modest influence of tuning power settings. Specific settings are recommended for each of the devices studied. Ablation of larger lesions may require more repeat P-RFA shots in different locations rather than a simple modulation of ablation parameters.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6336466
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher © Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63364662019-02-01 EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model Barret, Maximilien Leblanc, Sarah Rouquette, Alexandre Chaussade, Stanislas Terris, Benoit Prat, Frédéric Endosc Int Open Introduction  Two devices are currently available to perform pancreatic radiofrequency ablation (P-RFA). Potential clinical indications might extend from the treatment of pancreatic cystic lesions to ablation of small pancreatic solid lesions or cytoreduction of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas, but more preclinical data from animal models are needed to optimize P-RFA operation. Methods  P-RFA was performed under laparotomy and under endoscopic ultrasonographic guidance on the liver and pancreatic parenchyma of four live swine using the Habib EUS RFA (EMcision Ltd, London, UK) probe and the EUS-RA needle (Taewoong Medical, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea). Animals were sacrificed 2 hours after the procedure. Influence of tuning ablation time and power on tissue ablation were studied by histopathological assessment of the maximal depth of tissue damage on representative slides for each P-RFA shot. Results  The Habib probe in the liver parenchyma resulted in tissue necrosis increasing within the range of 1.9 ± 0.5 mm (Power = 8 W, Time = 120 s) to 2.5 ± 1 mm (Power = 10 W, Time = 120 s). In the pancreatic parenchyma, tissue damage ranged from 3.1 ± 0.4 mm (Power = 8 W, Time = 120 s) to 2.3 ± 0.1 mm (12 W, 120 s) in depth. EUS RFA ablation of the liver parenchyma resulted in tissue damage ranging from 1.6 ± 0.2 mm (Power = 30 W, Time = 11 s) to 1.5 ± 0.1 mm (Power = 70 W, Time = 9 s); in the pancreas, ablation depth ranged from 3.6 ± 0.5 mm (Power = 30 W, Time = 15 s) to 3.8 ± 0.4 mm (Power = 70 W, Time = 11 s). Conclusion  Both devices allow for effective ablation of pancreatic tissue within 1.5 to 3.8 mm around the RFA electrode, with a modest influence of tuning power settings. Specific settings are recommended for each of the devices studied. Ablation of larger lesions may require more repeat P-RFA shots in different locations rather than a simple modulation of ablation parameters. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019-02 2019-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC6336466/ /pubmed/30705944 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0668-5653 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Barret, Maximilien
Leblanc, Sarah
Rouquette, Alexandre
Chaussade, Stanislas
Terris, Benoit
Prat, Frédéric
EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
title EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
title_full EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
title_fullStr EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
title_full_unstemmed EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
title_short EUS-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
title_sort eus-guided pancreatic radiofrequency ablation: preclinical comparison of two currently available devices in a pig model
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6336466/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30705944
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/a-0668-5653
work_keys_str_mv AT barretmaximilien eusguidedpancreaticradiofrequencyablationpreclinicalcomparisonoftwocurrentlyavailabledevicesinapigmodel
AT leblancsarah eusguidedpancreaticradiofrequencyablationpreclinicalcomparisonoftwocurrentlyavailabledevicesinapigmodel
AT rouquettealexandre eusguidedpancreaticradiofrequencyablationpreclinicalcomparisonoftwocurrentlyavailabledevicesinapigmodel
AT chaussadestanislas eusguidedpancreaticradiofrequencyablationpreclinicalcomparisonoftwocurrentlyavailabledevicesinapigmodel
AT terrisbenoit eusguidedpancreaticradiofrequencyablationpreclinicalcomparisonoftwocurrentlyavailabledevicesinapigmodel
AT pratfrederic eusguidedpancreaticradiofrequencyablationpreclinicalcomparisonoftwocurrentlyavailabledevicesinapigmodel