Hiraoka M, Jo S, Akuta K, Nishimura Y, Takahashi M, Abe M
Cancer. 1987 Jul 1;60(1):121-7. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19870701)60:1<121::aid-cncr2820600123>3.0.co;2-i.
The thermometry results of radiofrequency (RF) capacitive hyperthermia for 60 deep-seated tumors in 59 patients are reported. Hyperthermia was administered regionally using two RF capacitive heating equipments which the authors have developed in cooperation with Yamamoto Vinyter Company Ltd., (Osaka, Japan). Intratumor temperatures were measured by thermocouples inserted through angiocatheters which were placed 5 cm to 12 cm deep into the tissues. Tumor center temperatures were measured for 307 treatments in all tumors; thermal distributions within tumors and surrounding normal tissues were obtained for 266 treatments of 53 tumors by microthermocouples. Thermometry results obtained were summarized as follows. A maximum tumor center temperature greater than 43 degrees C and 42 degrees C to 43 degrees C was obtained in 23 (38%) and 14 (23%) of the 60 tumors respectively. The time required to reach 43 degrees C in the tumor center was within 20 minutes after the start of hyperthermia in 87% of tumors heated to more than 43 degrees C. Temperature variations within a tumor exceeded 2 degrees C in 81% of tumors heated to more than 43 degrees C. The lowest tumor temperature greater than 42 degrees C was achieved in six of the 53 tumors (11%). Of 42 tumors in which temperatures of the subcutaneous fat, surrounding normal tissues, and the tumor center were compared, 24 (57%) showed the highest temperature in the tumor center and ten (24%) in the subcutaneous fat. When the heating efficacy was assessed in terms of a maximum tumor center, it great deal depended on the treatment site, tumor size, thickness of subcutaneous fat, and tumor type. Tumors in the head and neck, thorax, lower abdomen, and pelvis could be heated better than tumors in the upper abdomen. Greater heating efficacy was shown in patients with large, hypovascular tumors, and with the subcutaneous fat measuring less than 15 mm thick. The predominant limiting factor for power elevation was pain associated with heating. Systemic signs including increases in pulse rate and body temperature were not serious and seldom became limiting factors for power elevation. Our thermometry results indicate that the advantages of deep RF capacitive heating are its applicability to various anatomic sites and negligible systemic effects. The disadvantages are that its primary usefulness is limited to patients with thin subcutaneous fat and with large or hypovascular tumors.
本文报告了59例患者60个深部肿瘤的射频（RF）电容式热疗温度测量结果。热疗采用两台由作者与日本大阪山本维尼特尔公司合作研发的射频电容加热设备进行局部治疗。瘤内温度通过插入血管导管的热电偶测量，血管导管置于组织内5厘米至12厘米深处。对所有肿瘤的307次治疗测量了肿瘤中心温度；通过微热电偶对53个肿瘤的266次治疗获得了肿瘤及周围正常组织内的热分布。所获得的温度测量结果总结如下。60个肿瘤中，分别有23个（38%）和14个（23%）的肿瘤中心最高温度大于43℃以及在42℃至43℃之间。在加热至超过43℃的肿瘤中，87%的肿瘤在热疗开始后20分钟内肿瘤中心温度达到43℃。在加热至超过43℃的肿瘤中，81%的肿瘤内温度变化超过2℃。53个肿瘤中有6个（11%）达到最低肿瘤温度大于42℃。在比较皮下脂肪、周围正常组织和肿瘤中心温度的42个肿瘤中，24个（57%）肿瘤中心温度最高，10个（24%）皮下脂肪温度最高。当根据肿瘤中心最高温度评估加热效果时，很大程度上取决于治疗部位、肿瘤大小、皮下脂肪厚度和肿瘤类型。头颈部、胸部、下腹部和骨盆的肿瘤比上腹部的肿瘤加热效果更好。皮下脂肪薄、肿瘤大或血供不足的患者显示出更好的加热效果。功率提升的主要限制因素是加热相关的疼痛。包括脉搏率和体温升高在内的全身症状不严重，很少成为功率提升的限制因素。我们的温度测量结果表明，深部射频电容加热的优点是适用于各种解剖部位且全身影响可忽略不计。缺点是其主要用途仅限于皮下脂肪薄、肿瘤大或血供不足的患者。
