Effects of magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation on bone mechanical properties and modeling

Journal of Therapeutic Ultrasound

Holger Grüll¹  Paul J. van Diest²  Natalie D. ter Hoeve²  Bert van Rietbergen³  Andrés J. Arias Moreno³  Sin Yuin Yeo³ 

[1] Philips Research Europe, High Tech Campus 11-p1.261A, Eindhoven, 5656 AE, The Netherlands;Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Room H04.312, Utrecht, The Netherlands;Department of Biomedical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology, High Tech Campus 11-p1.243, Eindhoven, 5656 AE, The Netherlands

关键词: Bone mechanical properties;    Ablation;    Bone;    Focused ultrasound;    HIFU;   

Others  :  1223091
DOI  :  10.1186/s40349-015-0033-8

 received in 2015-04-30, accepted in 2015-07-22,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (MR-HIFU) is a promising technique for palliative treatment of bone pain. In this study, the effects of MR-HIFU ablation on bone mechanics and modeling were investigated.

Methods

A total of 12 healthy rat femurs were ablated using 10 W for 46 ± 4 s per sonication with 4 sonications for each femur. At 7 days after treatments, all animals underwent MR and single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) imaging. Then, six animals were euthanized. At 1 month following ablations, the remaining six animals were scanned again with MR and SPECT/CT prior to euthanization. Thereafter, both the HIFU-treated and contralateral control bones of three animals from each time interval were processed for histology, whereas the remaining bones were subjected to micro-CT (μCT), three-point bending tests, and micro-finite element (micro-FE) analyses.

Results

At 7 days after HIFU ablations, edema formation around the treated bones coupled with bone marrow and cortical bone necrosis was observed on MRI and histological images. SPECT/CT and μCT images revealed presence of bone modeling through an increased uptake of^99m Tc-MDP and formation of woven bone, respectively. At 31 days after ablations, as illustrated by imaging and histology, healing of the treated bone and the surrounding soft tissue was noted, marked by decreased in amount of tissue damage, formation of scar tissue, and sub-periosteal reaction. The results of three-point bending tests showed no significant differences in elastic stiffness, ultimate load, and yield load between the HIFU-treated and contralateral control bones at 7 days and 1 month after treatments. Similarly, the elastic stiffness and Young’s moduli determined by micro-FE analyses at both time intervals were not statistically different.

Conclusions

Multimodality imaging and histological data illustrated the presence of HIFU-induced bone damage at the cellular level, which activated the bone repair mechanisms. Despite that, these changes did not have a mechanical impact on the bone.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Yeo et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

Fig. 7.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lynn JG, Zwemer RL, Chick AJ, Miller AE. A new method for the generation and use of focused ultrasound in experimental biology. J Gen Physiol. 1942; 26:179-93.
• [2]Lele PP. A simple method for production of trackless focal lesions with focused ultrasound: physical factors. J Physiol. 1962; 160(3):494-512.
• [3]Voogt MJ, Trillaud H, Kim YS, Mali WPTM, Barkhausen J, Bartels LW, Deckers R, Frulio N, Rhim H, Lim HK, Eckey T, Nieminen HJ, Mougenot C, Keserci B, Soini J, Vaara T, Köhler MO, Sokka S, van den Bosch MAAJ. Volumetric feedback ablation of uterine fibroids using magnetic resonance-guided high intensity focused ultrasound therapy. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22:411-7.
• [4]Kim Y, Keserci B, Partanen A, Rhim H, Lim HK, Park MJ, Köhler MO. Volumetric MR-HIFU ablation of uterine fibroids: role of treatment cell size in the improvement of energy efficiency. Eur J Radiol. 2012; 81:3652-9.
• [5]Park MJ, Kim Y, Rhim H, Lim HK. Safety and therapeutic efficacy of complete or near-complete ablation of symptomatic uterine fibroid tumors by MR imaging-guided high-intensity focused US therapy. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014; 25:231-9.
• [6]Ahmed HU, Hindley RG, Dickinson L, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Sahu M, Scott R, Allen C, Van der Meulen J, Emberton M. Focal therapy for localised unifocal and multifocal prostate cancer: a prospective development study. Lancet Oncol. 2012; 13:622-32.
• [7]Dickinson L, Ahmed HU, Kirkham AP, Allen C, Freeman A, Barber J, Hindley RG, Leslie T, Ogden C, Persad R, Winkler MH, Emberton M. A multi-centre prospective development study evaluating focal therapy using high intensity focused ultrasound for localised prostate cancer: the INDEX study. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013; 36:68-80.
• [8]Mearini L, D’Urso L, Collura D, Nunzi E, Muto G, Porena M. High-intensity focused ultrasound for the treatment of prostate cancer: a prospective trial with long-term follow-up. Scand J Urol. 2015; 49(4):267-74.
• [9]Huber PE, Jenne JW, Rastert R, Simiantonakis I, Sinn H-P, Strittmatter H-J, von Fournier D, Wannenmacher MF, Debus J. A new noninvasive approach in breast cancer therapy using magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Cancer Res. 2001; 61:8441-8447.
• [10]Merckel LG, Bartels LW, Köhler MO, van den Bongard HJGD, Deckers R, Mali WPTM, Binkert CA, Moonen CT, Gilhuijs KGA, van den Bosch MAAJ. MR-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of breast cancer with a dedicated breast platform. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013; 36:292-301.
• [11]Jolesz FA, Hynynen K, McDannold N, Freundlich D, Kopelman D. Noninvasive thermal ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma by using magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound. Gastroenterology. 2004; 127:S242-S247.
• [12]Chok KSH, Cheung TT, Lo RCL, Chu FSK, Tsang SHY, Chan ACY, Sharr WW, Fung JYY, Dai WC, Chan SC, Fan ST, Lo CM. Pilot study of high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation as a bridging therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma patients wait-listed for liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2014; 20:912-21.
• [13]Sung HY, Jung SE, Cho SH, Zhou K, Han J-Y, Han ST, et al. Long-term outcome of high-intensity focused ultrasound in advanced pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2011;1080–1086.
• [14]Wu F. High intensity focused ultrasound: a noninvasive therapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20:16480-16488.
• [15]Catane R, Beck A, Inbar Y, Rabin T, Shabshin N, Hengst S, Pfeffer RM, Hanannel A, Dogadkin O, Liberman B, Kopelman D. MR-guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) for the palliation of pain in patients with bone metastases—preliminary clinical experience. Ann Oncol. 2007; 18:163-7.
• [16]Gianfelice D, Gupta C, Kucharczyk W, Bret P, Havill D, Clemons M. Palliative treatment of painful bone metastases with MR imaging—guided focused ultrasound. Radiology. 2008; 249:355-63.
• [17]Liberman B, Gianfelice D, Inbar Y, Beck A, Rabin T, Shabshin N, Chander G, Hengst S, Pfeffer R, Chechick A, Hanannel A, Dogadkin O, Catane R. Pain palliation in patients with bone metastases using MR-guided focused ultrasound surgery: a multicenter study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009; 16:140-6.
• [18]Napoli A, Anzidei M, Marincola BC, Brachetti G, Ciolina F, Cartocci G, Marsecano C, Zaccagna F, Marchetti L, Cortesi E, Catalano C. Primary pain palliation and local tumor control in bone metastases treated with magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound. Invest Radiol. 2013; 48:351-8.
• [19]Huisman M, Van Den Bosch MAAJ, Wijlemans JW, Van Vulpen M, Van Der Linden YM, Verkooijen HM. Effectiveness of reirradiation for painful bone metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;8–14.
• [20]Hurwitz MD, Ghanouni P, Kanaev SV, Iozeffi D, Gianfelice D, Fennessy FM, Kuten A, Meyer JE, LeBlang SD, Roberts A, Choi J, Larner JM, Napoli A, Turkevich VG, Inbar Y, Tempany CMC, Pfeffer RM. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound for patients with painful bone metastases: phase III trial results. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106:1-9.
• [21]Geiger D, Napoli A, Conchiglia A, Gregori LM, Arrigoni F, Bazzocchi A, Busacca M, Moreschini O, Mastantuono M, Albisinni U, Masciocchi C, Catalano C. MR-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) ablation for the treatment of nonspinal osteoid osteoma: a prospective multicenter evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014; 96:743-51.
• [22]Weeks EM, Platt MW, Gedroyc W. MRI-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) to treat facet joint osteoarthritis low back pain-case series of an innovative new technique. Eur Radiol. 2012; 22:2822-2835.
• [23]Harnof S, Zibly Z, Shay L, Dogadkin O, Hanannel A, Inbar Y, Goor-Aryeh I, Caspi I. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound treatment of facet joint pain: summary of preclinical phase. J Ther Ultrasound. 2014; 2:9. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Izumi M, Ikeuchi M, Kawasaki M, Ushida T, Morio K, Namba H, Graven-Nielsen T, Ogawa Y, Tani T. MR-guided focused ultrasound for the novel and innovative management of osteoarthritic knee pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013; 14:267. BioMed Central Full Text
• [25]Bucknor MD, Rieke V, Seo Y, Horvai AE, Hawkins RA, Majumdar S, et al. Bone remodeling after MR imaging-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation: evaluation with MR imaging, CT, Na(18)F-PET, and histopathologic examination in a swine model. Radiology. 2014;132605.
• [26]Smith NB, Temkin JM, Shapiro F, Hynynen K. Thermal effects of focused ultrasound energy on bone tissue. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001; 27:1427-1433.
• [27]Kopelman D, Inbar Y, Hanannel A, Pfeffer RM, Dogadkin O, Freundlich D, Liberman B, Catane R. Magnetic resonance guided focused ultrasound surgery. Ablation of soft tissue at bone-muscle interface in a porcine model. Eur J Clin Invest. 2008; 38:268-275.
• [28]Bucknor MD, Rieke V, Do L, Majumdar S, Link TM, Saeed M. MRI-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation of bone: evaluation of acute findings with MR and CT imaging in a swine model. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2014; 40:1174-80.
• [29]Herman A, Avivi E, Brosh T, Schwartz I, Liberman B. Biomechanical properties of bone treated by magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound - an in vivo porcine model study. Bone. 2013; 57:92-7.
• [30]Bickels J, Dadia S, Lidar Z. Surgical management of metastatic bone disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91:1503-16.
• [31]Khiat A, Gianfelice D, Amara M, Boulanger Y. Influence of post-treatment delay on the evaluation of the response to focused ultrasound surgery of breast cancer by dynamic contrast enhanced MRI. Br J Radiol. 2006; 79:308-314.
• [32]Wijlemans JW, Deckers R, van den Bosch MAAJ, Seinstra BA, van Stralen M, van Diest PJ, et al. Evolution of the ablation region after magnetic resonance–guided high-intensity focused ultrasound ablation in a Vx2 tumor model. Invest Radiol. 2013;48.
• [33]Bab IA. Postablation bone marrow regeneration: an in vivo model to study differential regulation of bone formation and resorption. Bone. 1995; 17:437S-441S.
• [34]Wise JK, Sena K, Vranizan K, Pollock JF, Healy KE, Hughes WF, Sumner DR, Virdi AS. Temporal gene expression profiling during rat femoral marrow ablation-induced intramembranous bone regeneration. PLoS One. 2010; 5: Article ID e12987
• [35]Van Rietbergen B, Weinans H, Huiskes R, Odgaard A. A new method to determine trabecular bone elastic properties and loading using micromechanical finite-element models. J Biomech. 1995; 28:69-81.
• [36]Coleman RE. Metastatic bone disease: clinical features, pathophysiology and treatment strategies. Cancer Treat Rev. 2001; 27:165-76.
• [37]Saarto T, Janes R, Tenhunen M, Kouri M. Palliative radiotherapy in the treatment of skeletal metastases. Eur J Pain. 2002; 6:323-330.
• [38]Chow E, Zeng L, Salvo N, Dennis K, Tsao M, Lutz S. Update on the systematic review of palliative radiotherapy trials for bone metastases. Clin Oncol. 2012; 24:112-24.
• [39]Zhang Q, Carlson J, Ke HZ, Li J, Kim M, Murphy K, Mehta N, Gilligan J, Vignery A. Dramatic increase in cortical thickness induced by femoral marrow ablation followed by a 3-month treatment with PTH in rats. J Bone Miner Res. 2010; 25:1350-1359.