HIFU treatment can induce coagulative necrosis in breast cancers. Complete ablation has not been reported consistently on histopathology and no imaging modality has been able confidently to predict the percentage of complete ablation. Consistent tumour and margin necrosis with reliable follow-up imaging are required before HIFU ablation can be evaluated within large, prospective clinical trials.
In this paper, we present an evaluation study of a set of registration strategies for the alignment of sequences of 3D dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance breast images. The accuracy of the optimal registration strategies was determined on unseen data. The evaluation is based on the simulation of physically plausible breast deformations using finite element methods and on contrast-enhanced image pairs without visually detectable motion artifacts. The configuration of the finite element model was chosen according to its ability to predict in vivo breast deformations for two volunteers. We computed transformations for ten patients with 12 simulated deformations each. These deformations were applied to the postcontrast image to model patient motion occurring between pre- and postcontrast image acquisition. The original precontrast images were registered to the corresponding deformed postcontrast images. The performance of several registration configurations (rigid, affine, B-spline based nonrigid, single-resolution, multi-resolution, and volume-preserving) was optimized for five of the ten patients. The images were most accurately aligned with volume-preserving single-resolution nonrigid registration employing 40 or 20 mm control point spacing. When tested on the remaining five patients the optimal configurations reduced the average mean registration error from 1.40 to 0.45 mm for the whole breast tissue and from 1.20 to 0.32 mm for the enhancing lesion. These results were obtained on average within 26 (81) min for 40 (20) mm control point spacing. The visual appearance of the difference images from 30 patients was significantly improved after 20 mm volume-preserving single-resolution nonrigid registration in comparison to no registration or rigid registration. No substantial volume changes within the region of the enhancing lesions were introduced by this nonrigid registration.
Purpose: Breast conserving surgery is effective for breast cancer treatment but is associated with morbidity in particular high re-excision rates. We performed a systematic review to assess the current evidence for clinical outcomes with minimally invasive ablative techniques in the non-surgical treatment of breast cancer.Methods: A systematic search of the literature was performed using PubMed and Medline library databases to identify all studies published between 1994 and May 2016. Studies were considered eligible for inclusion if they evaluated the role of ablative techniques in the treatment of breast cancer and included ten patients or more. Studies that failed to fulfil the inclusion criteria were excluded.
Results:We identified 63 studies including 1608 patients whose breast tumours were treated with radiofrequency (RFA), high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryo-, laser or microwave ablation. Fifty studies reported on the number of patients with complete ablation as found on histopathology and the highest rate of complete ablation was achieved with RFA (87.1%, 491/564) and microwave ablation (83.2%, 89/107). Short-term complications were most often reported with microwave ablation (14.6%, 21/144). Recurrence was reported in 24 patients (4.2%, 24/570) and most often with laser ablation (10.7%, 11/103). The shortest treatment times were observed with RFA (15.6±5.6 minutes) and the longest with HIFU (101.5±46.6 minutes).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.