4.5 Article

An easy-to-use microwave hyperthermia system combined with spatially resolved MR temperature maps: Phantom and animal studies

期刊

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH
卷 135, 期 1, 页码 179-186

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2006.02.016

关键词

microwave; hyperthermia; convenient applicator; MR temperature map; noninvasive thermometry

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Hyperthermia has been used in multimodal cancer treatments, and in randomized, controlled studies, hyperthermia is an effective cancer therapy. For clinical accuracy and safety, however, temperature monitoring during treatment is essential. We aimed to develop a convenient microwave hyperthermia system combined with spatially resolved real-time temperature monitoring to improve its efficacy and safety. Materials and methods. Using an MR-compatible irradiation-type microwave applicator, agar phantoms, thigh muscles of rabbit, and subcutaneous VX2 tumors of rabbit were heated in combination with noninvasive MR temperature maps. For MR temperature calculation, a proton resonance frequency method was used. After determination of temperature coefficients and evaluation of the precision in MR thermometry, distribution of microwave heating over time was examined for each substance. Results. The temperature coefficients of phantoms, rabbit muscles, and VX2 tumors were -0.00977, -0.00976, and -0.01027 ppm/degrees C, respectively. The 95% limits of agreement of MR and fluoroptic thermometry in the three subjects were +0.318/-0.339 degrees C, +0.693/-0.661 degrees C, and +0.564/-0.526 degrees C, respectively. Concerning VX2 tumor, the average tumor temperature was 42.60 +/- 0.14 degrees C and the surface of skin was 43.27 +/- 0.45 degrees C in the 60-min experimental period. Conclusions. With this easy-to-use microwave hyperthermia system, effective hyperthermia was accomplished in phantoms and living animals in combination with MR temperature maps. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据