Enhancement of Boiling Histotripsy by Steering the Focus Axially During the Pulse Delivery

Treatment Planning and Aberration Correction Algorithm for HIFU Ablation of Renal Tumors

High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) applications for thermal or mechanical ablation of renal tumors often encounter challenges due to significant beam aberration and refraction caused by oblique beam incidence, inhomogeneous tissue layers, and presence of gas and bones within the beam. These losses can be significantly mitigated through sonication geometry planning, patient positioning, and aberration correction using multielement phased arrays. Here, a sonication planning algorithm is introduced, which uses the simulations to select the optimal transducer position and evaluate the effect of aberrations and acoustic field quality at the target region after aberration correction. Optimization of transducer positioning is implemented using a graphical user interface (GUI) to visualize a segmented 3-D computed tomography (CT)-based acoustic model of the body and to select sonication geometry through a combination of manual and automated approaches. An HIFU array (1.5 MHz, 256 elements) and three renal cell carcinoma (RCC) cases with different tumor locations and patient body habitus were considered. After array positioning, the correction of aberrations was performed using a combination of backpropagation from the focus with an ordinary least squares (OLS) optimization of phases at the array elements. The forward propagation was simulated using a combination of the Rayleigh integral and k-space pseudospectral method (k-Wave toolbox). After correction, simulated HIFU fields showed tight focusing and up to threefold higher maximum pressure within the target region. The addition of OLS optimization to the aberration correction method yielded up to 30% higher maximum pressure compared to the conventional backpropagation and up to 250% higher maximum pressure compared to the ray-tracing method, particularly in strongly distorted cases.

Insights from in vivo preclinical cancer studies with histotripsy

Histotripsy is the first noninvasive, non-ionizing, and non-thermal ablation technique that mechanically fractionates target tissue into acellular homogenate via controlled acoustic cavitation. Histotripsy has been evaluated for various preclinical applications requiring noninvasive tissue removal including cancer, brain surgery, blood clot and hematoma liquefaction, and correction of neonatal congenital heart defects. Promising preclinical results including local tumor suppression, improved survival outcomes, local and systemic anti-tumor immune responses, and histotripsy-induced abscopal effects have been reported in various animal tumor models. Histotripsy is also being investigated in veterinary patients with spontaneously arising tumors. Research is underway to combine histotripsy with immunotherapy and chemotherapy to improve therapeutic outcomes. In addition to preclinical cancer research, human clinical trials are ongoing for the treatment of liver tumors and renal tumors. Histotripsy has been recently approved by the FDA for noninvasive treatment of liver tumors. This review highlights key learnings from in vivo shock-scattering histotripsy, intrinsic threshold histotripsy, and boiling histotripsy cancer studies treating cancers of different anatomic locations and discusses the major considerations in planning in vivo histotripsy studies regarding instrumentation, tumor model, study design, treatment dose, and post-treatment tumor monitoring.

The histotripsy spectrum: differences and similarities in techniques and instrumentation

Since its inception about two decades ago, histotripsy - a non-thermal mechanical tissue ablation technique - has evolved into a spectrum of methods, each with distinct potentiating physical mechanisms: intrinsic threshold histotripsy, shock-scattering histotripsy, hybrid histotripsy, and boiling histotripsy. All methods utilize short, high-amplitude pulses of focused ultrasound delivered at a low duty cycle, and all involve excitation of violent bubble activity and acoustic streaming at the focus to fractionate tissue down to the subcellular level. The main differences are in pulse duration, which spans microseconds to milliseconds, and ultrasound waveform shape and corresponding peak acoustic pressures required to achieve the desired type of bubble activity. In addition, most types of histotripsy rely on the presence of high-amplitude shocks that develop in the pressure profile at the focus due to nonlinear propagation effects. Those requirements, in turn, dictate aspects of the instrument design, both in terms of driving electronics, transducer dimensions and intensity limitations at surface, shape (primarily, the F-number) and frequency. The combination of the optimized instrumentation and the bio-effects from bubble activity and streaming on different tissues, lead to target clinical applications for each histotripsy method. Here, the differences and similarities in the physical mechanisms and resulting bioeffects of each method are reviewed and tied to optimal instrumentation and clinical applications.