Abstract
Background
sequential or simultaneous applications of multiple antennas have been proposed to create larger ablation zone; however, there is a lack of data in patients affected by liver tumors, with potentially different results from animal liver models. The purpose of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of liver percutaneous microwave ablation using simultaneous activation of two antennas to treat lesions bigger than 2,5 cm; particularly the focus was assessing whether the ratio of ablation zone volume in millimeters to applied energy in kilojoules [R(AZ:E)] differs between hepatocellular carcinoma in a cirrhotic liver and liver metastasis and if it is correlated to complications incidence or recurrence of disease.
Methods
Fifty-five liver microwave ablation performed with two simultaneous antennas from March 2017 to June 2021 were retrospectively reviewed; 9 procedures were excluded due to the association with Chemoembolization. Size, shape, volume of lesions and ablation zones were recorded. Technical success was defined as complete devascularization of the treated area at the post-procedural CT. R(AZ:E) was determined dividing the ablation zone volume in mm3 by the amount of energy in kilojoules applied in each procedure and complications were reported.
Results
Technical success was achieved in all the procedures. Mean R(AZ:E) was 0,75 ± 0,58. T-student test for patients with HCC and patients with metastasis about R(AZ:E) was significant (p = 0.03). The incidence of bilomas was lower for HCC (p = 0.022). One-month follow-up showed Complete Response (CR) in 44/46 (95,6%) patients; Three-six months follow-up demonstrated: CR in 43/46 (93.5%) cases and 12 months follow-up highlighted CR in 40/45 (88,9%) cases.
Conclusions
These results provide preliminary evidence of efficacy and safety of simultaneous liver MWA using two antennas, highlighting the importance of procedural indications.
Acknowledgments
The graphical abstract of this manuscript was created using BioRender.
Informed consent statement
Patient informed consent was not necessary according to the retrospective nature of the study and after approval of our Ethics Committee Approval.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s). The APC funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.
Data availability statement
Not applicable.