Comparison of four endoluminal radiofrequency ablation devices and four power generators in an ex vivo bovine liver model

The aim of the present study was to investigate the <em>ex vivo</em> results of four different endoluminal bipolar radiofrequency ablation (RFA) probes at different energy settings and using four different power generators. <em>Ex vivo</em> RFA was performed on bovine liver u...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rheinheimer, Stephan (Author) , Jacobsen, Anna (Author) , Mayer, Philipp (Author) , Kauczor, Hans-Ulrich (Author) , Mahnken, Andreas H. (Author)
Format: Article (Journal)
Language:English
Published: November/December 2021
In: World Academy of Sciences journal
Year: 2021, Volume: 3, Issue: 6, Pages: 1-7
ISSN:2632-2919
DOI:10.3892/wasj.2021.128
Online Access:Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.3892/wasj.2021.128
Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/wasj.2021.128
Get full text
Author Notes:Stephan Rheinheimer, Anna Jacobsen, Philipp Mayer, Hans-Ulrich Kauczor and Andreas Horst Mahnken
Description
Summary:The aim of the present study was to investigate the <em>ex vivo</em> results of four different endoluminal bipolar radiofrequency ablation (RFA) probes at different energy settings and using four different power generators. <em>Ex vivo</em> RFA was performed on bovine liver using four different bipolar RFA probes: i) Habib™ EndoHPB (EMcision); ii) Habib™ VesOpen (EMcision); iii) Celon ProCurve micro 300‑C09 (Olympus Corporation); and iv) Celon ProCurve 1200 S15 (Olympus Corporation). The following generators were also used: Erbe Vio 300D, KLS Martin Maxium, Olympus CelonPOWER and Boston RF3000. Overall, 430 ablations were carried out. The results revealed significant differences in the size of the achieved lesions and the duration of ablation (P<0.05) between the four different ablation devices. The maximum lesion diameters achieved with the devises were as follows: HabibTM EndoHPB, 13 watts (W; mean ± standard deviation, 10.3±1.8 mm); Habib™ VesOpen, 12 W (11.3±0.6); Celon ProCurve micro, 2 W (7.9±2.2); and Celon ProCurve 1200, 10 W (9.2±1.1). The maximum lesion diameters induced by the various generators differed significantly. On the whole, the present study demonstrates that lesion size and ideal power settings vary between different endoluminal ablation devices and generators. The combination of the probe and generator should not be varied in clinical practice to ensure reliable results.
Item Description:Gesehen am 23.05.2023
Physical Description:Online Resource
ISSN:2632-2919
DOI:10.3892/wasj.2021.128