Abstract
Introduction
The objective was to determine the ablation size of a single 15-min freeze and compare it with the conventional 10-min freeze–8-min thaw–10-min freeze protocol. Secondary objectives were to determine the ablation margin and to ascertain whether islands of viable tissue remain within the ablation zone.
Materials and Methods
Five adult swine under general anesthesia were used. After surgical abdominal exposure, two ablations were performed in liver and two in kidney. One ablation utilized the 15-min and the second the 10–8–10-min protocol. At maximum ice-ball, tissue ink was infused via an angiographic catheter in hepatic or renal artery to stain the non-frozen tissue. Animals were euthanized and organs examined macro- and microscopically.
Results
Three histological regions were observed: (A) a viable/stained region representing the tissue outside the ice-ball, (B) a central necrotic area representing the ablated region within the ice-ball and (C) an unstained but viable margin representing the non-lethal margin within ice-ball. Ablation size did not vary with protocol but did for tissue type. Renal ablation was approximately 5 × 4 cm with both protocols, whereas liver ablation was approximately 6.7 × 4.4 cm. Ablation margin was measured at 1 mm irrespective of ablation protocol or tissue. No islands of viable tissue were identified within the ablation zone.
Discussion
Fifteen-minute cryoablation yielded an ablation size and margin identical to that of the conventional 10–8–10-min protocol. Within the ablated region, cell death was uniform. The only difference was a larger cryoablation zone in hepatic tissue compared to renal tissue, likely attributable to differences in blood perfusion.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Georgiades CS, Rodriguez R. Efficacy and safety of percutaneous cryoablation for stage 1A/B renal cell carcinoma: results of a prospective, single-arm, 5-years study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014;37:1494–9.
Horn CJ, Fischman AM, Fung JW, et al. Percutaneous microwave ablation of renal parenchymal tumors using a 2.4 GHz gas-cooled probe: initial results and technique. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24:S20–1.
Niemeyer DJ, Simo KA, McMillan MT, et al. Optimal ablation volumes are achieved at submaximal power settings in a 245-GHz microwave ablation system. Surgical Innovation. 2015;22:41–5.
Chan JY, Ooi EH. Sensitivity of thermophysiological models of cryoablation to the thermal and biophysical properties of tissues. Cryobiology. 2016;73:304–15.
Erinjeri JP, Clark TWI. Cryoablation: mechanism of action and devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21:S187–91.
Gage AA, Baust J. Mechanisms of tissue injury in cryosurgery. Cryobiology. 1998;37:171–86.
Nakayama A, Kuwahara Y, Iwata K, Kawamura M. The limiting radius for freezing a tumor during percutaneous cryoablation. J Heat Transf. 2008;130:111101–1111016.
Williams LR, Leggett RW. Reference values for resting blood flow to organs of man. Clin Phys Physiol Meas. 1989;10:187–217.
Ge BH, Guzzo TJ, Nadolski GJ, et al. Percutaneous renal cryoablation: short-axis ice-ball margin as a predictor of outcome. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR. 2016;27:403–9.
Georgiades C, Rodriguez R, Azene E, et al. Determination of the nonlethal margin inside the visible “ice-ball” during percutaneous cryoablation of renal tissue. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36:783–90.
Overduin CG, Jenniskens SF, Sedelaar JP, Bomers JG, Futterer JJ. Percutaneous MR-guided focal cryoablation for recurrent prostate cancer following radiation therapy: retrospective analysis of iceball margins and outcomes. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(11):4828–36.
Tani S, Tatli S, Hata N, et al. Three-dimensional quantitative assessment of ablation margins based on registration of pre- and post-procedural MRI and distance map. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2016;11:1133–42.
van Oostenbrugge TJ, Langenhuijsen JF, Overduin CG, Jenniskens SF, Mulders PFA, Futterer JJ. Percutaneous MR Imaging-guided cryoablation of small renal masses in a 3-T closed-bore MR imaging environment: initial experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR. 2017;28(1098–107):e1.
Martin JW, Patel RM, Okhunov Z, Vyas A, Vajgrt D, Clayman RV. Multipoint thermal sensors associated with improved oncologic outcomes following cryoablation. J Endourol. 2017;31:355–60.
Cahan WG. Cryosurgery of malignant and benign tumors. Fed. Proc. 1965;24:241–8.
Sutherland SE, Resnick MI, Maclennan GT, Goldman HB. Does the size of the surgical margin in partial nephrectomy for renal cell cancer really matter? J Urol. 2002;167(1):61–4.
Sofocleous CT, Garg SK, Cohen P, et al. Ki 67 is an independent predictive biomarker of cancer specific and local recurrence-free survival after lung tumor ablation. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(Suppl 3):S676–83.
Sotirchos VS, Petrovic LM, Gonen M, et al. Colorectal cancer liver metastases: biopsy of the ablation zone and margins can be used to predict oncologic outcome. Radiology. 2016;280:949–59.
Korpan NN, Hochwarter G, Sellner F. Cryoscience and cryomedicine: new mechanisms of biological tissue injury following low temperature exposure. Experimental study. Klin Khir. 2009;7–8:80–5.
Mazur P. Freezing of living cells: mechanisms and implications. Am J Physiol. 1984;247:C125–42.
Snoeren N, Jansen MC, Rijken AM, et al. Assessment of viable tumour tissue attached to needle applicators after local ablation of liver tumours. Dig Surg. 2009;26:56–62.
Funding
The study was supported by Galil Medical.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Senior author is a consultant for Galil Medical. On behalf of the other authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
The study was approved by the Johns Hopkins University Animal Care & Use Committee.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Werner, J.D., Tregnago, A.C., Netto, G.J. et al. Single 15-Min Protocol Yields the Same Cryoablation Size and Margin as the Conventional 10–8–10-Min Protocol: Results of Kidney and Liver Swine Experiment. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 41, 1089–1094 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-1950-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-1950-z