ABSTRACT

We aimed to validate actually achieved macroscopic ablation volumes in relation to calculated target volumes using four different radiofrequency ablation (RFA) systems operated with default settings and protocols for 3 cm and 5 cm target volumes in ex vivo bovine liver.

Sixty-four cuboid liver specimens were ablated with four commercially available RFA systems (Radionics Cool-tip, AngioDynamic 1500X, Boston Scientific RF 3000, Celon CelonPower LAB): 16 specimens for each system; eight for 3 cm, and eight for 5 cm. Ablation diameters were measured, volumes were calculated, and RFA times were recorded.

For the 3 cm target ablation volume, all tested RFA systems exceeded the mathematically calculated volume of 14.14 cm3. For the 3 cm target ablation volume, mean ablation volume and mean ablation time for each RFA system were as follows: 28.5±6.5 cm3, 12.0±0.0 min for Radionics Cool-tip; 17.1±4.9 cm3, 9.36±0.63 min for AngioDynamic 1500X; 29.7±11.7 cm3, 4.60±0.50 min for Boston Scientific RF 3000; and 28.8±7.0 cm3, 20.85±0.86 min for Celon CelonPower LAB. For the 5 cm target ablation volume, Radionics Cool-tip (48.3±9.9 cm3, 12.0±0.0 min) and AngioDynamic 1500X (39.4±16.2 cm3, 19.59±1.13 min) did not reach the mathematically calculated target ablation volume (65.45 cm3), whereas Boston Scientific RF 3000 (71.8±14.5 cm3, 9.15±2.93 min) and Celon CelonPower LAB (93.9±28.1 cm3, 40.21±1.78 min) exceeded it.

While all systems reached the 3 cm target ablation volume, results were variable for the 5 cm target ablation volume. Only Boston Scientific RF 3000 and Celon CelonPower LAB created volumes above the target, whereas Radionics Cool-tip and AngioDynamic 1500X remained below the target volume. For the 3 cm target ablation volume, AngioDynamic 1500X with 21% deviation was closest to the target volume. For the 5 cm target volume Boston Scientific RF 3000 with 10% deviation was closest.