Schröer Simon, Düx Daniel, Löning Caballero Josef Joaquin, Glandorf Julian, Gerlach Thomas, Horstmann Dominik, Belker Othmar, Gutt Moritz, Wacker Frank, Speck Oliver, Hensen Bennet, Gutberlet Marcel
Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, Hanover 30625, Lower Saxony, Germany; Research Campus STIMULATE, Otto-Hahn-Straße 2, Magdeburg 39106, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany.
Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, Hanover 30625, Lower Saxony, Germany; Research Campus STIMULATE, Otto-Hahn-Straße 2, Magdeburg 39106, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany.
Z Med Phys. 2025 Feb;35(1):59-68. doi: 10.1016/j.zemedi.2024.07.004. Epub 2024 Aug 10.
Magnetic Resonance (MR) thermometry is used for the monitoring of MR-guided microwave ablations (MWA), and for the intraoperative evaluation of ablation regions. Nevertheless, the accuracy of temperature mapping may be compromised by electromagnetic interference emanating from the microwave (MW) generator. This study evaluated different setups for improving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during MWA with a modified MW generator. MWA was performed in 15 gel phantoms comparing three setups: The MW generator was placed outside the MR scanner room, either connected to the MW applicator using a penetration panel with a radiofrequency (RF) filter and a 7 m coaxial cable (Setup 1), or through a waveguide using a 5 m coaxial cable (Setup 2). Setup 3 employed the MW generator within the MR scan room, connected by a 5 m coaxial cable. The coaxial cables in setups 2 and 3 were modified with custom shielding to reduce interference. The setups during ablation (active setup) were compared to a reference setup without the presence of the MW system. Thermometry and thermal dose maps (CEM43 model) were compared for the three configurations. Primary endpoints for assessment were signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), temperature precision, Sørensen-Dice-Coefficient (DSC), and RF-noise spectra. Setup 3 showed highly significant electromagnetic interference during ablation with a SNR decrease by -60.4%±13.5% (p<0.001) compared to reference imaging. For setup 1 and setup 2 no significant decrease in SNR was measured with differences of -2.9%±9.8% (p=0.6) and -1.5%±12.8% (p=0.8), respectively. SNR differences were significant between active setups 1 and 3 with -51.2%±16.1% (p<0.001) and between active setups 2 and 3 with -59.0%±15.5% (p<0.001) but not significant between active setups 1 and 2 with 19.0%±13.7% (p=0.09). Furthermore, no significant differences were seen in temperature precision or DSCs between all setups, ranging from 0.33 °C ± 0.04 °C (Setup 1) to 0.38 °C ± 0.06 °C (Setup 3) (p=0.6) and from 87.0%±1.6% (Setup 3) to 88.1%±1.6% (Setup 2) (p=0.58), respectively. Both setups (1 and 2) with the MW generator outside the MR scanner room were beneficial to reduce electromagnetic interference during MWA. Moreover, provided that a shielded cable is utilized in setups 2 and 3, all configurations displayed negligible differences in temperature precision and DSCs, indicating that the location of the MW generator does not significantly impact the accuracy of thermometry during MWA.
磁共振(MR)测温用于监测磁共振引导下的微波消融(MWA)以及消融区域的术中评估。然而,温度映射的准确性可能会受到微波(MW)发生器发出的电磁干扰的影响。本研究评估了使用改进型MW发生器在MWA期间改善磁共振成像(MRI)的不同设置。在15个凝胶体模中进行MWA,比较了三种设置:MW发生器放置在MR扫描室外,要么使用带有射频(RF)滤波器的穿透板和7米同轴电缆连接到MW施加器(设置1),要么通过波导使用5米同轴电缆(设置2)。设置3将MW发生器置于MR扫描室内,通过5米同轴电缆连接。对设置2和3中的同轴电缆进行了定制屏蔽以减少干扰。将消融期间的设置(活动设置)与不存在MW系统的参考设置进行比较。比较了三种配置的测温图和热剂量图(CEM43模型)。评估的主要终点是信噪比(SNR)、温度精度、 Sørensen-Dice系数(DSC)和射频噪声谱。与参考成像相比,设置3在消融期间显示出高度显著的电磁干扰,SNR降低了-60.4%±13.5%(p<0.001)。对于设置1和设置2,未测量到SNR的显著降低,差异分别为-2.9%±9.8%(p=0.6)和-1.5%±12.8%(p=0.8)。活动设置1和3之间的SNR差异显著,为-51.2%±16.1%(p<0.001),活动设置2和3之间的SNR差异显著,为-59.0%±15.5%(p<0.001),但活动设置1和2之间的差异不显著,为19.0%±13.7%(p=0.09)。此外,所有设置之间在温度精度或DSC方面均未观察到显著差异,范围分别为0.33°C±0.04°C(设置1)至0.38°C±0.06°C(设置3)(p=0.6)以及87.0%±1.6%(设置3)至88.1%±1.6%(设置2)(p=0.58)。MW发生器位于MR扫描室外的两种设置(1和2)均有利于减少MWA期间的电磁干扰。此外,只要在设置2和3中使用屏蔽电缆,所有配置在温度精度和DSC方面的差异均微不足道,这表明MW发生器的位置对MWA期间测温的准确性没有显著影响。