Gupta P, Heffter T, Zubair M, Hsu IC, Burdette EC, Diederich CJ. Treatment Planning Strategies for Interstitial Ultrasound Ablation of Prostate Cancer.
IEEE OPEN JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY 2024;
5:362-375. [PMID:
38899026 PMCID:
PMC11186654 DOI:
10.1109/ojemb.2024.3397965]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2024] [Revised: 03/28/2024] [Accepted: 05/03/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE
To develop patient-specific 3D models using Finite-Difference Time-Domain (FDTD) simulations and pre-treatment planning tools for the selective thermal ablation of prostate cancer with interstitial ultrasound. This involves the integration with a FDA 510(k) cleared catheter-based ultrasound interstitial applicators and delivery system.
METHODS
A 3D generalized "prostate" model was developed to generate temperature and thermal dose profiles for different applicator operating parameters and anticipated perfusion ranges. A priori planning, based upon these pre-calculated lethal thermal dose and iso-temperature clouds, was devised for iterative device selection and positioning. Full 3D patient-specific anatomic modeling of actual placement of single or multiple applicators to conformally ablate target regions can be applied, with optional integrated pilot-point temperature-based feedback control and urethral/rectum cooling. These numerical models were verified against previously reported ex-vivo experimental results obtained in soft tissues.
RESULTS
For generic prostate tissue, 360 treatment schemes were simulated based on the number of transducers (1-4), applied power (8-20 W/cm2), heating time (5, 7.5, 10 min), and blood perfusion (0, 2.5, 5 kg/m3/s) using forward treatment modelling. Selectable ablation zones ranged from 0.8-3.0 cm and 0.8-5.3 cm in radial and axial directions, respectively. 3D patient-specific thermal treatment modeling for 12 Cases of T2/T3 prostate disease demonstrate applicability of workflow and technique for focal, quadrant and hemi-gland ablation. A temperature threshold (e.g., Tthres = 52 °C) at the treatment margin, emulating placement of invasive temperature sensing, can be applied for pilot-point feedback control to improve conformality of thermal ablation. Also, binary power control (e.g., Treg = 45 °C) can be applied which will regulate the applied power level to maintain the surrounding temperature to a safe limit or maximum threshold until the set heating time.
CONCLUSIONS
Prostate-specific simulations of interstitial ultrasound applicators were used to generate a library of thermal-dose distributions to visually optimize and set applicator positioning and directivity during a priori treatment planning pre-procedure. Anatomic 3D forward treatment planning in patient-specific models, along with optional temperature-based feedback control, demonstrated single and multi-applicator implant strategies to effectively ablate focal disease while affording protection of normal tissues.
Collapse