Outcomes of CEM43 in Predicting Thermal Damage Induced by Focal Laser Ablation in Controlled Ex Vivo Experiments: A Comparison to Histology and MRI.
CEM43
focal laser ablation
thermal‐dose threshold
Journal
Lasers in surgery and medicine
ISSN: 1096-9101
Titre abrégé: Lasers Surg Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8007168
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Aug 2024
22 Aug 2024
Historique:
revised:
26
06
2024
received:
02
04
2024
accepted:
02
08
2024
medline:
23
8
2024
pubmed:
23
8
2024
entrez:
23
8
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Focal laser ablation (FLA) serves as a targeted therapy for prostate cancer (PCa). Clinical studies have demonstrated significant variations in ablation volumes with consistent fiber configurations. Consequently, a prediction model is needed for the safe application of FLA in treating PCa. This study aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of FLA-induced temperature profiles in controlled ex vivo experiments using clinical laser treatment protocols. Additionally, it sought to examine the effectiveness of the CEM43 model in predicting the zone of irreversible damage (ZID) and to compare these findings with outcomes derived from the Arrhenius model. Freshly excised postmortem human prostate and porcine liver specimens were used for controlled ex vivo ablation. Tissues were secured in a Perspex sample holder for precise placement of the laser fiber and thermocouples. FLA was conducted with a 1064-nm Nd:YAG laser at 3 W in continuous-wave mode for 10 min. Pre- and post-FLA 3D T1-weighted 7 T MRI scans were obtained to assess the treatment area. Whole-mount hematoxylin and eosin histological slides were prepared and digitized. On histology, the ZID was defined as the total of vaporized, carbonized, and coagulated tissue. A 2D thermal development map was created from temperature data, using bi-cubic interpolation. The cumulative equivalent thermal isoeffect dose at 43°C in minutes (CEM43) model was applied to predict the ZID, with 240 equivalent minutes (240-CEM43) used as the damage threshold. Additionally, the Arrhenius thermal model was used for comparison of CEM43 results. Predicted ZIDs were compared to MRI and histology. FLA treatment was performed on ex vivo human prostate samples (n = 2) and porcine liver specimens (n = 5). For human prostate tissue, FLA did not result in an identifiable ZID upon histological macroscopic examination or a lesion on MRI. Ex vivo porcine liver samples showed a clearly demarcated oval-shaped hyperintense lesion surrounding the laser fiber tip on post-FLA MRI. The MRI lesion (range 1.6-2.1 cm FLA on ex vivo human prostate showed no thermal damage on histopathology or MRI. Ex vivo porcine liver FLA resulted in identifiable ZID on histology and lesions on MRI. 240-CEM43 generally overestimated the ZID and had less variability compared to histology. Results from the Arrhenius model were in better agreement with the histology findings, but still did not predict the individual FLA-induced histological thermal damage. Inter-experiment ZID variability underlines the need for developing a more comprehensive predictive dosimetry model for FLA in PCa treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Focal laser ablation (FLA) serves as a targeted therapy for prostate cancer (PCa). Clinical studies have demonstrated significant variations in ablation volumes with consistent fiber configurations. Consequently, a prediction model is needed for the safe application of FLA in treating PCa.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the reproducibility of FLA-induced temperature profiles in controlled ex vivo experiments using clinical laser treatment protocols. Additionally, it sought to examine the effectiveness of the CEM43 model in predicting the zone of irreversible damage (ZID) and to compare these findings with outcomes derived from the Arrhenius model.
METHODS
METHODS
Freshly excised postmortem human prostate and porcine liver specimens were used for controlled ex vivo ablation. Tissues were secured in a Perspex sample holder for precise placement of the laser fiber and thermocouples. FLA was conducted with a 1064-nm Nd:YAG laser at 3 W in continuous-wave mode for 10 min. Pre- and post-FLA 3D T1-weighted 7 T MRI scans were obtained to assess the treatment area. Whole-mount hematoxylin and eosin histological slides were prepared and digitized. On histology, the ZID was defined as the total of vaporized, carbonized, and coagulated tissue. A 2D thermal development map was created from temperature data, using bi-cubic interpolation. The cumulative equivalent thermal isoeffect dose at 43°C in minutes (CEM43) model was applied to predict the ZID, with 240 equivalent minutes (240-CEM43) used as the damage threshold. Additionally, the Arrhenius thermal model was used for comparison of CEM43 results. Predicted ZIDs were compared to MRI and histology.
RESULTS
RESULTS
FLA treatment was performed on ex vivo human prostate samples (n = 2) and porcine liver specimens (n = 5). For human prostate tissue, FLA did not result in an identifiable ZID upon histological macroscopic examination or a lesion on MRI. Ex vivo porcine liver samples showed a clearly demarcated oval-shaped hyperintense lesion surrounding the laser fiber tip on post-FLA MRI. The MRI lesion (range 1.6-2.1 cm
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
FLA on ex vivo human prostate showed no thermal damage on histopathology or MRI. Ex vivo porcine liver FLA resulted in identifiable ZID on histology and lesions on MRI. 240-CEM43 generally overestimated the ZID and had less variability compared to histology. Results from the Arrhenius model were in better agreement with the histology findings, but still did not predict the individual FLA-induced histological thermal damage. Inter-experiment ZID variability underlines the need for developing a more comprehensive predictive dosimetry model for FLA in PCa treatment.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : This research was supported by Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (80450).
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Lasers in Surgery and Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
J. Ferlay, M. Ervik, F. Lam, et al., “Cancer Today: Data Visualization Tools for Exploring the Global Cancer Burden in 2018,” (2018), https://gco.iarc.fr/today.
H. Sung, J. Ferlay, R. L. Siegel, et al., “Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries,” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 71 (2021): 209–249, https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660.
N. Mottet, J. Bellmunt, M. Bolla, et al., “EAU‐ESTRO‐SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment With Curative Intent,” European Urology 71, no. 4 (April 2017): 618–629, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.08.003.
S. E. Eggener, A. Yousuf, S. Watson, S. Wang, and A. Oto, “Phase II Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guided Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer,” Journal of Urology 196, no. 6 (December 2016): 1670–1675, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.07.074.
E. Walser, A. Nance, L. Ynalvez, et al., “Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: Results in 120 Patients With Low‐ to Intermediate‐Risk Disease,” Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 30, no. 3 (2019): 401–409.e2, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2018.09.016.
N. Hübner, S. F. Shariat, and M. Remzi, “Focal Therapy of Prostate Cancer,” Current Opinion in Urology 28, no. 6 (November 2018): 550–554, https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000547.
U. Lindner, N. Lawrentschuk, R. A. Weersink, et al., “Focal Laser Ablation for Prostate Cancer Followed by Radical Prostatectomy: Validation of Focal Therapy and Imaging Accuracy,” European Urology 57, no. 6 (June 2010): 1111–1114, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2010.03.008.
C. M. Pacella, L. Breschi, D. Bottacci, and L. Masotti, “Physical Principles of Laser Ablation,” in Image‐Guided Laser Ablation, eds. C. M. Pacella, T. Jiang, and G. Mauri (Berlin, Germany: Springer International Publishing, 2020), 7–18.
S. A. van Nimwegen, H. F. L'Eplattenier, A. I. Rem, J. J. van der Lugt, and J. Kirpensteijn, “Nd:YAG Surgical Laser Effects in Canine Prostate Tissue: Temperature and Damage Distribution,” Physics in Medicine and Biology 54, no. 1 (January 2009): 29–44, https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/54/1/003.
R. Wang, X. Wu, J. J. Chen, and B. Hu, “Nd:YAG Surgical Laser Effects in Canine Prostate Tissue: Ablation Effect and Damage Distribution,” International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine 10, no. 3 (2017): 5622–5628.
D. A. Woodrum, K. R. Gorny, L. A. Mynderse, et al., “Feasibility of 3.0 T Magnetic Resonance Imaging‐Guided Laser Ablation of a Cadaveric Prostate,” Urology 75, no. 6 (June 2010): 1514.e1–1514.e6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2010.01.059.
L. A. M. J. G. van Riel, R. A. A. van Kollenburg, A. N. Vis, et al., “Safety and Feasibility of Soractelite Transperineal Focal Laser Ablation for Prostate Cancer and Short‐Term Quality of Life Analysis From a Multicenter Pilot Study,” European Urology Open Science 39 (May 2022): 48–54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2022.02.012.
I. Meneghetti, D. Giardino, R. Morganti, et al., “A Single‐Operator Experience Using Echolaser SoracteliteTM for Focal Laser Ablation of Prostate Cancer: One More Arrow in the Quiver for the Conservative Management of the Disease,” Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia 94, no. 4 (2022): 406–412.
U. Lindner, R. A. Weersink, M. A. Haider, et al., “Image Guided Photothermal Focal Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: Phase I Trial,” Journal of Urology 182, no. 4 (October 2009): 1371–1377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.06.035.
R. A. A. van Kollenburg, L. A. M. J. G. van Riel, P. R. Bloemen, et al., “Transperineal Laser Ablation Treatment for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Due to Benign Prostatic Obstruction: Protocol for a Prospective In Vivo Pilot Study,” JMIR Research Protocols 9, no. 1 (January 2020): e15687, https://doi.org/10.2196/15687.
L. A. M. J. G. van Riel, R. A. A. van Kollenburg, J. E. Freund, et al., “Reliable Visualization of the Treatment Effect of Transperineal Focal Laser Ablation in Prostate Cancer Patients by Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Contrast‐Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging,” European Urology Open Science 54 (2023): 72–79, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2023.06.002.
S. A. Sapareto and W. C. Dewey, “Thermal Dose Determination in Cancer Therapy,” International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics 10, no. 6 (1984): 787–800.
R. Geoghegan, G. ter Haar, K. Nightingale, L. Marks, and S. Natarajan, “Methods of Monitoring Thermal Ablation of Soft Tissue Tumors—A Comprehensive Review,” Medical Physics 49, no. 2 (2022): 769–791, https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.15439.
P. Saccomandi, C. Giraudeau, F. Marchegiani, et al., “Real‐Time Temperature Monitoring and Estimation of Thermal Damage in Pancreas Undergoing Magnetic Resonance‐Guided Laser Ablation: First In Vivo Study,” in 2017 IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference (I2MTC), 22–25 May 2017, Turin, Italy (New York: IEEE, 2017), 1–6.
H. Singh, C. R. Osswald, A. Rossman, et al., “Preclinical Assessment of a Noncooled MR Thermometry–Based Neurosurgical Laser Therapy System,” Journal of Neurosurgery 141, no. 2 (March 2024): 518–528, https://doi.org/10.3171/2023.12.JNS232154.
H. T. I. Assi, M. G. Arsenault, W. M. Whelan, and J. C. Kumaradas, “A New Thermal Dose Model Based on Vogel–Tammann–Fulcher Behaviour in Thermal Damage Processes,” International Journal of Hyperthermia 39, no. 1 (December 2022): 697–705, https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2022.2065367.
M. Zenker, “Argon Plasma Coagulation,” GMS Krankenhaushygiene interdisziplinar 3, no. 1 (November 2008): 15.
P. S. Yarmolenko, E. J. Moon, C. Landon, et al., “Thresholds for Thermal Damage to Normal Tissues: An Update,” International Journal of Hyperthermia 27, no. 4 (2011): 320–343, https://doi.org/10.3109/02656736.2010.534527.
W. H. Nau, C. J. Diederich, A. B. Ross, et al, “MRI‐Guided Interstitial Ultrasound Thermal Therapy of the Prostate: A Feasibility Study in the Canine Model,” Medical Physics 32, no. 3 (2005): 733–743, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1861163.
S. Blauth, F. Hübner, C. Leithäuser, N. Siedow, and T. J. Vogl, “Mathematical Modeling of Vaporization During Laser‐Induced Thermotherapy in Liver Tissue,” Journal of Mathematics in Industry 10, no. 1 (June 2020): 16, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13362-020-00082-4.
I. A. Chang and U. D. Nguyen, “Thermal Modeling of Lesion Growth With Radiofrequency Ablation Devices,” BioMedical Engineering OnLine 3, no. 1 (2004): 27, https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-925x-3-27.
R. Agah, J. A. Pearce, A. J. Welch, and M. Motamedi, “Rate Process Model for Arterial Tissue Thermal Damage: Implications on Vessel Photocoagulation,” Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 15, no. 2 (1994): 176–184, https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.1900150205.
M. A. Ansari, M. Erfanzadeh, and E. Mohajerani, “Mechanisms of Laser–Tissue Interaction: II. Tissue Thermal Properties,” Journal of Lasers in Medical Sciences 4, no. 3 (Summer 2013): 99–106.
A. Roggan, K. Dörschel, O. Minet, D. Wolff, and G. Müller, “The Optical Properties of Biological Tissue in the Near Infrared Wavelength Range—Review and Measurements,” in Laser‐Induced Interstitial Thermotherapy, Berlin, eds. M. Gerhard and R. André (Bellingham, WA, USA: SPIE, June 22–23, 1995), 10–44.
C. Sturesson and S. Andersson‐Engels, “Tissue Temperature Control Using a Water‐Cooled Applicator: Implications for Transurethral Laser‐Induced Thermotherapy of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia,” Medical Physics 24, no. 3 (1997): 461–470, https://doi.org/10.1118/1.597912.
T. D. Khokhlova, Y. N. Wang, J. C. Simon, et al., “Ultrasound‐Guided Tissue Fractionation by High Intensity Focused Ultrasound in an In Vivo Porcine Liver Model,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111, no. 22 (2014): 8161–8166, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1318355111.
S. R. Guntur, K. I. Lee, D.‐G. Paeng, A. J. Coleman, and M. J. Choi, “Temperature‐Dependent Thermal Properties of Ex Vivo Liver Undergoing Thermal Ablation,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 39, no. 10 (October 2013): 1771–1784, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2013.04.014.
E. G. Macchi, M. Gallati, G. Braschi, A. Cigada, and L. Comolli, “Temperature Distribution During RF Ablation on Ex Vivo Liver Tissue: IR Measurements and Simulations,” Heat and Mass Transfer 51, no. 5 (May 2015): 611–620, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-014-1437-7.
S. S. Bosman, S. S. K. Phoa, A. Bosma, and M. J. C. van Gemert, “Effect of Percutaneous Interstitial Thermal Laser on Normal Liver of Pigs: Sonographic and Histopathological Correlations,” British Journal of Surgery 78, no. 5 (2005): 572–575, https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.1800780517.
O. Garcia‐Medina, K. Gorny, R. McNichols, et al., “In Vivo Evaluation of a MR‐Guided 980 nm Laser Interstitial Thermal Therapy System for Ablations in Porcine Liver,” Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 43, no. 4 (2011): 298–305, https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.21044.
O. Seror, M. Lepetit‐Coiffé, B. Le Bail, et al., “Real Time Monitoring of Radiofrequency Ablation Based on MR Thermometry and Thermal Dose in the Pig Liver in Vivo,” European Radiology 18 (2008): 408–416.
S. J. Graham, L. Chen, M. Leitch, et al., “Quantifying Tissue Damage Due to Focused Ultrasound Heating Observed by MRI,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 41, no. 2 (1999): 321–328, https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1522-2594(199902)41:2<321::AID-MRM16>3.0.CO;2-9.