Danahey J, Seip R, Lee B, Nassiri N, Dardik A, Guzman R, Nassiri N. Imaging of vascular malformations with a high-intensity focused ultrasound probe for treatment planning.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2021;
9:1467-1472.e2. [PMID:
33838310 DOI:
10.1016/j.jvsv.2021.03.011]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2020] [Accepted: 03/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to investigate whether a current commercially available high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) probe can adequately image targeted vascular malformations (VMs) in anticipation of HIFU treatment planning and delivery.
METHODS
We enrolled 10 consecutive patients who were scheduled to undergo treatment of symptomatic peripheral VMs confirmed by routine preoperative contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and soft tissue duplex ultrasound. The lesions were situated no more than 6 cm from the skin. After induction of general anesthesia and before surgical intervention, we prepared and positioned the Sonablate HIFU probe (SonaCare Medical, LLC, Charlotte, NC) to obtain multiple B-mode images of the targeted VM in the transverse and longitudinal dimensions. We then rated the quality of the images and the feasibility of the imaging process itself using a previously devised questionnaire aimed at evaluating the adequacy of the images for potential HIFU treatment planning and delivery. The patients subsequently underwent surgical intervention and clinical follow-up for their VM per the standard protocol.
RESULTS
The study included 10 participants aged 21 to 67 years (mean ± standard deviation, 36.5 ± 16.5 years). Six patients (60%) identified as female. The VMs imaged consisted of eight venous (80%), one lymphatic (10%), and one combined lymphovenous (10%) malformation. The lesions were in the extremities only (50%), trunk only (20%), trunk and extremities (20%), or neck and extremities (10%). Pain related to the VM was present in all 10 patients (100%). In all 10 patients, the boundary and location of the VM could be visualized via the HIFU probe despite the diminished B-mode imaging resolution. The absence of Doppler functionality in the HIFU probe did not prevent the identification of the VMs in any patient up to a depth of 6 cm. The results from the postimaging survey showed that difficulty in preparing the study device for imaging was 1.1 ± 0.3 and difficulty in use was 1.1 ± 0.1, with a score of 1 equal to easy and 5 to difficult. The stability of the acoustic coupling to the patient was 1.3 ± 0.2, with a score of 1 representing very stable.
CONCLUSIONS
We were able to ultrasonically identify and outline all targeted peripheral VMs using a commercially available HIFU probe in anticipation of treatment planning and delivery. Baseline magnetic resonance imaging and soft tissue duplex ultrasound remain essential tools for guiding probe placement and HIFU imaging.
Collapse