Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for real-time monitoring of interstitial laser thermal therapy in the focal treatment of prostate cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: We report a case study of the application of contrastenhancedultrasonography (CEUS) for intraoperative monitoringof thermal ablation of a single focus of prostate cancer.Methods: A patient presented with biopsy-proven, solitary-focus,low-risk prostate cancer and was recruited into a clinical trial ofinterstitial laser thermal focal therapy. Multiparametric magneticresonance imaging (MRI) was used to locate the single dominantfocus, and photothermal ablation was performed at the tumoursite under the guidance of transrectal ultrasonography. TransrectalCEUS using systemic bolus injections of the intravascular contrastagent Definity was performed immediately before, several timesduring and on completion of therapy. Lesions observed on CEUSwere compared with treatment effect as measured by tissue devascularizationon 1-week gadolinium (Gd)–enhanced MRI.Results: Baseline images showed CEUS contrast-agent signalthroughout the prostate. During and after treatment, large hypocontrastregions were observed surrounding the treatment fibres, indicatingthe presence of an avascular lesion resulting from photothermaltherapy. Lesion size was found to increase during the deliveryof thermal energy. Lesion size measured using CEUS (16 × 11 mm)was similar to the 7-day lesion measured using Gd-enhancedT1-weighted MRI.Conclusion: Focal therapy for prostate cancer requires both completetreatment of the dominant tumour focus and minimal morbidity.The application of CEUS during therapy appears to providean excellent measure of the actual treatment effect. Hence, it can beused to ensure that the therapy encompasses the whole target butdoes not extend to surrounding critical structures. Future clinicalstudies are planned with comparisons of intraoperative CEUS toGd-enhanced MRI at 7 days and whole-mount pathology samples.Introduction : Nous décrivons un cas d’application de la techniqued’échographie de contraste pour la surveillance peropératoire pendantl’ablation thermique d’un cancer de la prostate à foyer unique.Méthodologie : Le patient présentait un cancer de la prostate à faiblerisque et à foyer unique confirmé par biopsie et a été inscrit àun essai clinique portant sur la thérapie thermique interstitiellepar laser. Après une épreuve d’IRM à paramètres multiples en vuede localiser le foyer dominant unique, on a procédé à une ablationphotothermique guidée par échographie transrectale. On aeffectué une échographie transrectale à l’aide d’injections bolusintravasculaires de l’agent de contraste Definity immédiatementavant l’ablation, de même que plusieurs fois pendant l’interventionet à la fin de celle-ci. Les lésions observées lors de l’échographiede contraste ont été comparées à l’effet du traitement, tel quemesuré par la dévascularisation tissulaire lors d’une épreuve d’IRMavec injection de Gd une semaine plus tard.Résultats : Les images initiales montrent le signal de l’agent decontraste dans toute la prostate. Pendant et après le traitement, degrandes zones d’hypocontraste ont été observées autour des zonesde traitement, indiquant la présence d’une lésion avasculairecausée par la thérapie photothermique. La taille de la lésion s’estaccrue pendant la libération de l’énergie thermique. La taille dela lésion, telle que mesurée par échographie de contraste (16 ×11 mm) n’avait pas changé une semaine plus tard lors de l’épreuved’IRM T1 avec injection de Gd.Conclusion : La thérapie focale appliquée à la prostate requiert letraitement complet du foyer tumoral dominant et une morbiditéminimale. Le recours à l’échographie de contraste durant le traitementsemble un excellent moyen de mesurer l’effet réel du traitement.On peut donc l’utiliser pour assurer que le traitement englobetoute la zone cible sans s’étendre aux structures adjacentes.D’autres études cliniques comparant les résultats à ceux de l’IRMavec injection de Gd après 7 jours et des échantillons anatomopathologiquesin toto sont prévues.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".