Mechanic effect of pulsed focused ultrasound in tumor and muscle tissue evaluated by MRI, histology, and microarray analysis

Focused Ultrasound Effects on Osteosarcoma Cell Lines

MRI guided Focused Ultrasound (MRgFUS) has shown to be effective therapeutic modality for non-invasive clinical interventions in ablating of uterine fibroids, in bone metastasis palliative treatments, and in breast, liver, and prostate cancer ablation. MRgFUS combines high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) with MRI images for treatment planning and real time thermometry monitoring, thus enabling non-invasive ablation of tumor tissue. Although in the literature there are several studies on the Ultrasound (US) effects on cell in culture, there is no systematic evidence of the biological effect of Magnetic Resonance guided Focused Ultrasound Surgery (MRgFUS) treatment on osteosarcoma cells, especially in lower dose regions, where tissues receive sub-lethal acoustic power. The effect of MRgFUS treatment at different levels of acoustic intensity (15.5-49 W/cm²) was investigated on Mg-63 and Saos-2 cell lines to evaluate the impact of the dissipation of acoustic energy delivered outside the focal area, in terms of cell viability and osteogenic differentiation at 24 h, 7 days, and 14 days after treatment. Results suggested that the attenuation of FUS acoustic intensities from the focal area (higher intensities) to the “far field” (lower intensities) zones might determine different osteosarcoma cell responses, which range from decrease of cell proliferation rates (from 49 W/cm² to 38.9 W/cm²) to the selection of a subpopulation of heterogeneous and immature living cells (from 31.1 W/cm² to 15.5 W/cm²), which can clearly preserve bone tumor cells.

MRI-guided focused ultrasound surgery in musculoskeletal diseases: the hot topics

MRI-guided focused ultrasound surgery (MRgFUS) is a minimally invasive treatment guided by the most sophisticated imaging tool available in today's clinical practice. Both the imaging and therapeutic sides of the equipment are based on non-ionizing energy. This technique is a very promising option as potential treatment for several pathologies, including musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders. Apart from clinical applications, MRgFUS technology is the result of long, heavy and cumulative efforts exploring the effects of ultrasound on biological tissues and function, the generation of focused ultrasound and treatment monitoring by MRI. The aim of this article is to give an updated overview on a "new" interventional technique and on its applications for MSK and allied sciences.

Quantitative evaluation of internal marks made using MRgFUS as seen on MRI, CT, US, and digital color images - a pilot study

This pilot study compared the detectability of internal thermal marks produced with MRI-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) on MRI, computed tomography (CT), ultrasonography (US), and color images from digital scanning. Internal marks made using MRgFUS could potentially guide surgical, biopsy or radiotherapy procedures. New Zealand White rabbits (n = 6) thigh muscle were marked using a Philips MRgFUS system. Before and after sonications, rabbits were imaged using T1- and T2-weighted MRI. Then rabbits were sacrificed and imaging was performed using CT and US. After surgical excision specimens were scanned for color conspicuity analysis. Images were read by a radiologist and quantitative analysis of signal intensity was calculated for marks and normal muscle. Of a total of 19 excised marks, approximately 79%, 63%, and 62% were visible on MRI, CT, and US, respectively. The average maximum temperature elevation in the marks during MRgFUS was 39.7 ± 10.1 °C, and average dose diameter (i.e., the diameter of the area that achieved a thermal dose greater than 240 cumulative equivalent minutes at 43 °C) of the mark at the focal plane was 7.3 ± 2.1 mm. On MRI the average normalized signal intensities were significantly higher in marks compared to normal muscle (p < 0.05). On CT, the marked regions were approximately 10 HU lower than normal muscle (p < 0.05). The results demonstrate that MRgFUS can be used to create internal marks that are visible on MRI, CT and US.

Ex vivo evaluation of high-intensity focused ultrasound with ultrasonic-induced cavitation bubbles

PURPOSE

In high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) comprising high-intensity burst ultrasound (triggering pulse) and medium-intensity continuous wave ultrasound (heating wave), optimizing the effects of the triggering pulse conditions on the coagulated volume may help to reduce treatment times.

METHODS

HIFU combined with a triggering pulse was applied to chicken deep pectoral muscles. The acoustic power of the heating wave was set to 36, 54, or 72 W. Four different triggering pulse conditions were used: heating wave only; or pulse widths and pulse repetition frequencies of 30 μs and 1 kHz, 300 μs, and 100 Hz, or 3 ms and 10 Hz.

RESULTS

Compared to the heating wave only condition, the coagulated volume was significantly larger under all conditions that included a triggering pulse. Significant differences were also observed in the ellipticity of the coagulated region between some conditions.

CONCLUSION

HIFU combined with a triggering pulse may play an important role in reducing treatment times.

Estimation of thermal dose from MR thermometry during application of nonablative pulsed high intensity focused ultrasound

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether MR thermometry is sufficiently fast, accurate, and spatially resolved for monitoring the thermal safety of nonablative pulsed high intensity ultrasound (pHIFU) treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A combination of real MR thermometry data and modeling was used to analyze the effects of temporal and spatial averaging as well as noise on the peak temperatures and thermal doses that would be measured by MR thermometry.

RESULTS

MR thermometry systematically underestimates the temperature and thermal doses during pHIFU treatment. Small underestimates of peak temperature can lead to large underestimates of thermal dose. Spatial averaging errors are small for ratios of pixel dimension to heating zone radius less than 0.25, which may be achieved by reducing the voxel size or steering the acoustic beam. Thermal dose might also be underestimated for very short, high power pulses due to temporal averaging. A simple correction factor based on the applied power and duty cycle may be applied to determine the upper bound of this effect.

CONCLUSION

The temperature and thermal dose measured using MR thermometry during pulsed HIFU treatment is probably sufficient in most instances. Simple corrections may be used to calculate an upper bound where this is a critical factor.

Investigation of cellular and molecular responses to pulsed focused ultrasound in a mouse model

Continuous focused ultrasound (cFUS) has been widely used for thermal ablation of tissues, relying on continuous exposures to generate temperatures necessary to induce coagulative necrosis. Pulsed FUS (pFUS) employs non-continuous exposures that lower the rate of energy deposition and allow cooling to occur between pulses, thereby minimizing thermal effects and emphasizing effects created by non-thermal mechanisms of FUS (i.e., acoustic radiation forces and acoustic cavitation). pFUS has shown promise for a variety of applications including drug and nanoparticle delivery; however, little is understood about the effects these exposures have on tissue, especially with regard to cellular pro-homing factors (growth factors, cytokines, and cell adhesion molecules). We examined changes in murine hamstring muscle following pFUS or cFUS and demonstrate that pFUS, unlike cFUS, has little effect on the histological integrity of muscle and does not induce cell death. Infiltration of macrophages was observed 3 and 8 days following pFUS or cFUS exposures. pFUS increased expression of several cytokines (e.g., IL-1α, IL-1β, TNFα, INFγ, MIP-1α, MCP-1, and GMCSF) creating a local cytokine gradient on days 0 and 1 post-pFUS that returns to baseline levels by day 3 post-pFUS. pFUS exposures induced upregulation of other signaling molecules (e.g., VEGF, FGF, PlGF, HGF, and SDF-1α) and cell adhesion molecules (e.g., ICAM-1 and VCAM-1) on muscle vasculature. The observed molecular changes in muscle following pFUS may be utilized to target cellular therapies by increasing homing to areas of pathology.