Tumor phantom model for MRI-guided focused ultrasound ablation studies.
MRI
ablation
focused ultrasound
phantom
thermometry
tumor
Journal
Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
revised:
24
03
2023
received:
16
12
2022
accepted:
02
05
2023
medline:
12
10
2023
pubmed:
25
5
2023
entrez:
25
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The persistent development of focused ultrasound (FUS) thermal therapy in the context of oncology creates the need for tissue-mimicking tumor phantom models for early-stage experimentation and evaluation of relevant systems and protocols. This study presents the development and evaluation of a tumor-bearing tissue phantom model for testing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided FUS (MRgFUS) ablation protocols and equipment based on MR thermometry. Normal tissue was mimicked by a pure agar gel, while the tumor simulator was differentiated from the surrounding material by including silicon dioxide. The phantom was characterized in terms of acoustic, thermal, and MRI properties. US, MRI, and computed tomography (CT) images of the phantom were acquired to assess the contrast between the two compartments. The phantom's response to thermal heating was investigated by performing high power sonications with a 2.4 MHz single element spherically focused ultrasonic transducer in a 3T MRI scanner. The estimated phantom properties fall within the range of literature-reported values of soft tissues. The inclusion of silicon dioxide in the tumor material offered excellent tumor visualization in US, MRI, and CT. MR thermometry revealed temperature elevations in the phantom to ablation levels and clear evidence of larger heat accumulation within the tumor owing to the inclusion of silicon dioxide. Overall, the study findings suggest that the proposed tumor phantom model constitutes a simple and inexpensive tool for preclinical MRgFUS ablation studies, and potentially other image-guided thermal ablation applications upon minimal modifications.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The persistent development of focused ultrasound (FUS) thermal therapy in the context of oncology creates the need for tissue-mimicking tumor phantom models for early-stage experimentation and evaluation of relevant systems and protocols.
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
This study presents the development and evaluation of a tumor-bearing tissue phantom model for testing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided FUS (MRgFUS) ablation protocols and equipment based on MR thermometry.
METHODS
METHODS
Normal tissue was mimicked by a pure agar gel, while the tumor simulator was differentiated from the surrounding material by including silicon dioxide. The phantom was characterized in terms of acoustic, thermal, and MRI properties. US, MRI, and computed tomography (CT) images of the phantom were acquired to assess the contrast between the two compartments. The phantom's response to thermal heating was investigated by performing high power sonications with a 2.4 MHz single element spherically focused ultrasonic transducer in a 3T MRI scanner.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The estimated phantom properties fall within the range of literature-reported values of soft tissues. The inclusion of silicon dioxide in the tumor material offered excellent tumor visualization in US, MRI, and CT. MR thermometry revealed temperature elevations in the phantom to ablation levels and clear evidence of larger heat accumulation within the tumor owing to the inclusion of silicon dioxide.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, the study findings suggest that the proposed tumor phantom model constitutes a simple and inexpensive tool for preclinical MRgFUS ablation studies, and potentially other image-guided thermal ablation applications upon minimal modifications.
Substances chimiques
Silicon Dioxide
7631-86-9
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
5956-5968Subventions
Organisme : Research and Innovation Foundation of Cyprus
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
McGarry CK, Grattan LJ, Ivory AM, et al. Tissue mimicking materials for imaging and therapy phantoms: a review. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65(23):1-43. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/abbd17
Ahmad MS, Suardi N, Shukri A, et al. Dynamic hepatocellular carcinoma model within a liver phantom for multimodality imaging. Eur J Radiol Open. 2020;7:100257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100257
Gan Q, Wang D, Ye J, et al. Benchtop and animal validation of a projective imaging system for potential use in intraoperative surgical guidance. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0157794. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157794
McHugh DJ, Zhou FL, Wimpenny I, et al. A biomimetic tumor tissue phantom for validating diffusion-weighted MRI measurements. Magn Reson Med. 2018;80(1):147-158. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.27016
LaRochelle EPM, Streeter SS, Littler EA, Ruiz AJ. 3D-printed tumor phantoms for assessment of in vivo fluorescence imaging analysis methods. Mol Imaging Biol. 2022; 25: 212-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-022-01783-5
Hatamikia S, Gulyas I, Birkfellner W, et al. Realistic 3D printed imaging tumor phantoms for validation of image processing algorithms. Med Phys. 2022:1-17. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2211.14861
Valladares A, Beyer T, Rausch I. Physical imaging phantoms for simulation of tumor heterogeneity in PET, CT, and MRI: an overview of existing designs. Med Phys. 2020;47(4):2023-2037. https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.14045
Presotto L, Bettinardi V, De Bernardi E, et al. PET textural features stability and pattern discrimination power for radiomics analysis: an “ad-hoc” phantoms study. Phys Medica. 2018;50:66-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.05.024
Waugh SA, Lerski RA, Bidaut L, Thompson AM. The influence of field strength and different clinical breast MRI protocols on the outcome of texture analysis using foam phantoms. Med Phys. 2011;38(9):5058-5066. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3622605
Sramek MT, Shi Y, Quintanilla EA, et al. Development of a novel tumor phantom model for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and its applications. Med Imaging2020. 2020; 11315: 741-751. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2550597
Ng SY, Lin C. Low-cost and easily fabricated ultrasound-guided breast phantom for breast biopsy training. Prepr (Version 1) available Res Sq. 2020:1-22. doi:10.21203/rs.2.19957/v1
Groenhuis V, Siepel FJ, Veltman J, van Zandwijk JK, Stramigioli S. Stormram 4: an MR safe robotic system for breast biopsy. Ann Biomed Eng. 2018;46(10):1686-1696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-018-2051-5
Daniel BL, Birdwell RL, Black JW, Ikeda DM, Glover GH, Herfkens RJ. Interactive MR-guided, 14-gauge core-needle biopsy of enhancing lesions in a breast phantom model. Acad Radiol. 1997;4(7):508-512. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1076-6332(97)80238-3
Webb H, Lubner MG, Hinshaw JL. Thermal Ablation. Semin Roentgenol. 2011;46(2):133-141. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ro.2010.08.002
Glassberg MB, Ghosh S, Clymer JW, et al. Microwave ablation compared with radiofrequency ablation for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver metastases: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Onco Targets Ther. 2019;12:6407-6438. https://doi.org/10.2147/OTT.S204340
Izadifar Z, Izadifar Z, Chapman D, Babyn P. An introduction to high intensity focused ultrasound: systematic review on principles, devices, and clinical applications. J Clin Med. 2020;9(2):460. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9020460
Dabbagh A, Abdullah BJJ, Ramasindarum C, Abu Kasim NH. Tissue-mimicking gel phantoms for thermal therapy studies. Ultrason Imaging. 2014;36(4):291-316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0161734614526372
Lafon C, Zderic V, Noble ML, et al. Gel phantom for use in high-intensity focused ultrasound dosimetry. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2005;31(10):1383-1389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2005.06.004
Takegami K, Kaneko Y, Watanabe T, Maruyama T, Matsumoto Y, Nagawa H. Polyacrylamide gel containing egg white as new model for irradiation experiments using focused ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2004;30(10):1419-1422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2004.07.016
Eranki A, Mikhail AS, Negussie AH, Katti PS, Wood BJ, Partanen A. Tissue-mimicking thermochromic phantom for characterization of HIFU devices and applications. Int J Hyperthermia. 2019;36(1):518-529. https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2019.1605458
Zhou Y, Zhao L, Zhong X, et al. A thermochromic tissue-mimicking phantom model for verification of ablation plans in thermal ablation. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9(4):354. doi:10.21037/atm-21-523
Chen WJ, Wang Q, Kim CY. Gel phantom models for radiofrequency and microwave ablation of the liver. Dig Dis Interv. 2020;4(3):303-310. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1716737
Liu Z, Ahmed M, Weinstein Y, Yi M, Mahajan RL, Goldberg SN. Characterization of the RF ablation-induced “oven effect”: the importance of background tissue thermal conductivity on tissue heating. Int J Hyperth. 2006;22(4):327-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/02656730600609122
Haemmerich D, Schutt DJ. RF ablation at low frequencies for targeted tumor heating: In vitro and computational modeling results. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2011;58(2):404-410. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.2010.2085081
Ortega-Palacios R, Trujillo-Romero CJ, Cepeda-Rubio MFJ, Leija L, Hernández AV. Heat transfer study in breast tumor phantom during microwave ablation: modeling and experimental results for three different antennas. Electronics. 2020;9(3):535. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9030535
Zhong X, Zhou P, Zhao Y, Liu W, Zhang X. A novel tissue-mimicking phantom for US/CT/MR-guided tumor puncture and thermal ablation. Int J Hyperth. 2022;39(1):557-563. https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2022.2056249
Kim KS, Lee SY. Nanoparticle-mediated radiofrequency capacitive hyperthermia: a phantom study with magnetic resonance thermometry. Int J Hyperth. 2015;31(8):831-839. https://doi.org/10.3109/02656736.2015.1096968
Li K, Su Z, Xu E, Huang Q, Zeng Q, Zheng R. Evaluation of the ablation margin of hepatocellular carcinoma using CEUS-CT/MR image fusion in a phantom model and in patients. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3061-7
Antoniou A, Damianou C. MR relaxation properties of tissue-mimicking phantoms. Ultrasonics. 2022;119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106600
Duc NM, Keserci B. Emerging clinical applications of high-intensity focused ultrasound. Diagnostic Interv Radiol. 2019;25(5):398-409. https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2019.18556
Hassanuddin A, Choi JH, Seo DW, et al. Factors affecting tumor ablation during high intensity focused ultrasound treatment. Gut Liver. 2014;8(4):433-437. https://doi.org/10.5009/gnl.2014.8.4.433
An CY, Hsu YL, Tseng CS. An ultrasound-guided robotic HIFU ablation system with respiration induced displacement and time delay compensation. J Med Biol Eng. 2019;39(5):796-805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40846-019-00463-0
Kaczmarek K, Hornowski T, Antal I, Rajnak M, Timko M, Józefczak A. Sono-magnetic heating in tumor phantom. J Magn Magn Mater. 2020;500:166396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2020.166396
Farrer AI, Odéen H, de Bever J, et al. Characterization and evaluation of tissue-mimicking gelatin phantoms for use with MRgFUS. J Ther Ultrasound. 2015;3(1):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40349-015-0030-y
Madsen EL, Zagzebski JA, Frank GR. An anthropomorphic ultrasound breast phantom containing intermediate-sized scatteres. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1982;8(4):381-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-5629(82)80006-9
Zell K, Sperl JI, Vogel MW, Niessner R, Haisch C. Acoustical properties of selected tissue phantom materials for ultrasound imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52(20):N475-N484. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/52/20/N02
Drakos T, Giannakou M, Menikou G, Constantinides G, Damianou C. Characterization of a soft tissue-mimicking agar/wood powder material for MRgFUS applications. Ultrasonics. 2021;113: 10635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106357
Menikou G, Dadakova T, Pavlina M, Bock M, Damianou C. MRI compatible head phantom for ultrasound surgery. Ultrasonics. 2015;57:144-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2014.11.004
Menikou G, Yiannakou M, Yiallouras C, Ioannides C, Damianou C. MRI-compatible bone phantom for evaluating ultrasonic thermal exposures. Ultrasonics. 2016;71:12-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2016.05.020
Pichardo S, Melodelima D, Curiel L, Kivinen J. Suitability of a tumour-mimicking material for the evaluation of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation under magnetic resonance guidance. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58(7):2163-2183. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/58/7/2163
Menikou G, Yiannakou M, Yiallouras C, Ioannides C, Damianou C. MRI-compatible breast/rib phantom for evaluating ultrasonic thermal exposures. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg. 2018;14(1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1849
Damianou C. The role of phantoms in magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Digit Med. 2019;5(2):52-55. https://doi.org/10.4103/digm.digm_13_19
Menikou G, Damianou C. Acoustic and thermal characterization of agar based phantoms used for evaluating focused ultrasound exposures. J Ther Ultrasound. 2017;5:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40349-017-0093-z
Antoniou A, Georgiou L, Christodoulou T, et al. MR relaxation times of agar-based tissue-mimicking phantoms. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022; 23:e13533. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13533
Drakos T, Antoniou A, Evripidou N, et al. Ultrasonic attenuation of an agar, silicon dioxide, and evaporated milk gel phantom. J Med Ultrasound. 2021;29(4):239-249. https://doi.org/10.4103/JMU.JMU
Zeece M. Food additives. In: Introduction to the Chemistry of Food. 2020:251-311.
Antoniou A, Evripidou N, Giannakou M, Constantinides G, Damianou C. Acoustical properties of 3D printed thermoplastics. J Acoust Soc Am. 2021;149(4):2854-2864. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0004772
Drakos T, Giannakou M, Menikou G, Ioannides C, Damianou C. An improved method to estimate ultrasonic absorption in agar-based gel phantom using thermocouples and MR thermometry. Ultrasonics. 2020;103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2020.106089
Filippou A, Damianou C. Evaluation of ultrasonic scattering in agar-based phantoms using 3D printed scattering molds. J Ultrasound. 2022;25(3):597-609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-021-00630-7
Filippou A, Louca I, Damianou C. Characterization of a fat tissue mimicking material for high intensity focused ultrasound applications. J Ultrasound. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-022-00746-4
Bojorquez JZ, Bricq S, Acquitter C, Brunotte F, Walker PM, Lalande A. What are normal relaxation times of tissues at 3 T? Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;35:69-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2016.08.021
Drakos T, Giannakou M, Menikou G, et al. MRI-guided focused ultrasound robotic system for preclinical use. J Vet Med Anim Sci. 2021;4(1):1049.
Rieke V, Pauly KB. MR thermometry. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27(2):376-390. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.21265.MR
Peters RD, Hinks RS, Henkelman RM. Heat-source orientation and geometry dependence in proton-resonance frequency shift magnetic resonance thermometry. Magn Reson Med. 1999;41(5):909-918. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-2594(199905)41:5<909::AID-MRM9>3.0.CO;2-N
Bing C, Staruch R, Tillander M, et al. Drift correction for accurate PRF shift MR thermometry during mild hyperthermia treatments with MR-HIFU. Int J Hyperth. 2017;32(6):673-687. https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2016.1179799
De Zwart JA, Vimeux FC, Delalande C, Canioni P, Moonen CTW. Fast lipid-suppressed MR temperature mapping with echo-shifted gradient- echo imaging and spectral-spatial excitation. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42(1):53-59. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-2594(199907)42:1<53::AID-MRM9>3.0.CO;2-S
Mast TD. Empirical relationships between acoustic parametersin human soft tissues. Acoust Res Lett Online. 2000; 1(2). https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1336896
Goss SA, Frizzell LA, Dunn F. Ultrasonic absorption and attenuation in mammalian tissues. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1979;5(2):181-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-5629(79)90086-3
Chan V, Perlas A. Basics of ultrasound imaging. In: Atlas of Ultrasound-Guided Procedures in Interventional Pain Management. 2011:13-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1681-5_2
Giering K, Minet O, Lamprecht I, Müller G. Review of thermal properties of biological tissues. In: Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering; 1995:45-65.
Stanisz GJ, Odrobina EE, Pun J, et al. T1, T2 relaxation and magnetization transfer in tissue at 3T. Magn Reson Med. 2005;54(3):507-512. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.20605
Bottomley PA, Foster TH, Argersinger RE, Pfeifer LM. A review of normal tissue hydrogen NMR relaxation times and relaxation mechanisms from 1-100 MHz: dependence on tissue type, NMR frequency, temperature, species, excision, and age. Int J Med Phys Res Pract. 1984;11(4):425-448. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.595535
Antoniou A, Nikolaou A, Georgiou A, Evripidou N, Damianou C. Development of an US, MRI, and CT imaging compatible realistic mouse phantom for thermal ablation and focused ultrasound evaluation. Ultrasonics. 2023;131:106955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2023.106955
Kalra A, Yang K-H. Developing FE human models from medical images. In: Basic Finite Element Method as Applied to Injury Biomechanics. Academic Press; 2018:389-415. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809831-8.00009-X
Damianou C, Hynynen K. The effect of various physical parameters on the size and shape of necrosed tissue volumeuring ultrasound surgery. J Acoust Soc Am. 1994;95(3):1641-1649. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.408550
Kennedy JE, Haar GR TER, Cranston D. High intensity focused ultrasound: surgery of the future? Br J Radiol. 2003;76:590-599. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/17150274
Filippou A, Drakos T, Giannakou M, Evripidou N, Damianou C. Experimental evaluation of the near-field and far-field heating of focused ultrasound using the thermal dose concept. Ultrasonics. 2021;116:106513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106513
Ng SY, Lin C-L. A multilayered, lesion-embedded ultrasound breast phantom with realistic visual and haptic feedback for needle biopsy. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2022;48(8):1468-1483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2022.03.009