Thermal Distribution and Clinical Experience Using a Prototype, Three-Electrode Capacitive Device Jasmin 3.1000.

Endo, Masaru; Suzuki, Hirotoshi; Nakashima, Yuya; Nagashima, Kei; Tabata, Yutaka; Tabata, Kumiko; Imanish, Yoshimasa; Ohuchi, Yukitoshi; Suzuki, Satoshi; Arai, Kazunari; Koike, Tadashi; Yanagawa, Chuji

doi:10.3191/thermalmedicine.7.400

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The system was able to move a deep heating focus by changing output energy of each applicator [243]. Though good heat distribution had been shown on phantoms, and 41-42 ∘ C had been reached in deep tumors in clinical trials with enough safety [244], the clinical effect had been more than modest [245]. Oncocare was a classical design 13.56 MHz/600 W capacitive system with two symmetrical electrodes and had shown the similar clinical results [246].…”

Section: Hyperthermia and Electromagneticmentioning

confidence: 99%

The History of Hyperthermia Rise and Decline

Roussakow¹

2013

Conference Papers in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electromagnetic hyperthermia remains experimental treatment after 40 years of research and application in view of its “temperature concept” based on the belief that temperature is the only parameter of the efficacy. Initial “extreme hyperthermia” concept was based on the wrong premise of much higher thermal susceptibility of malignant cells and broad therapeutic range of hyperthermia, allowing to kill tumor cells by above-threshold (>43°C) temperature without damaging healthy tissues. Indeed, this therapeutic gap is minor or absent which makes the extreme hyperthermia impossible. The next concept of “thermal dose” was based on the ungrounded extrapolation of the biochemical Arrhenius relationship onto the living matter and formed the basis of “moderate hyperthermia” concept, believing that it could enhance tumor oxygenation and radio- and chemosensitivity, ignoring the special features of tumor blood flow. Both concepts have not been confirmed; “thermal dose” is currently proven to be not connected with any clinical outcome. Analysis of randomized trials with respect to biases has not confirmed hyperthermia efficacy. The growing evidence of athermal effects and their broad application has caused development of some athermal cancer treatments. Hyperthermia concept should be cardinally reevaluated now with respect to obvious bankruptcy of the temperature concept and development of the athermal concept.

show abstract

Section: Hyperthermia and Electromagneticmentioning

confidence: 99%

The History of Hyperthermia Rise and Decline

Roussakow¹

2013

Conference Papers in Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Thermal Distribution and Clinical Experience Using a Prototype, Three-Electrode Capacitive Device Jasmin 3.1000.

Cited by 1 publication

References 1 publication

The History of Hyperthermia Rise and Decline

The History of Hyperthermia Rise and Decline

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About