How Oncology Ablation Devices Work: A Technical Explanation

How Oncology Ablation Devices Work: A Technical Explanation

Introduction

In the evolving landscape of cancer treatment, minimally invasive techniques have emerged as powerful alternatives or complements to traditional surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Among these, **oncology ablation** stands out as a sophisticated approach that precisely targets and destroys cancerous cells while minimizing damage to surrounding healthy tissue. This technical explanation aims to demystify the mechanisms behind various oncology ablation devices, providing a comprehensive overview for both patients seeking to understand their treatment options and healthcare professionals looking to deepen their technical knowledge. Understanding the intricate science and engineering behind these devices is crucial for appreciating their efficacy and potential in modern oncology.

**Disclaimer:** This article is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Patients should consult with qualified healthcare professionals for diagnosis, treatment, and medical guidance.

The Science Behind Ablation: General Principles

At its core, tumor ablation relies on inducing **cellular necrosis**—the irreversible death of cells—within the targeted tumor. This is primarily achieved by exposing cancerous cells to extreme temperatures, either excessively hot or cold, or by disrupting their cellular integrity through non-thermal means. The effectiveness of ablation hinges on reaching specific cytotoxic thresholds that render cancer cells non-viable.

Cytotoxic Temperatures: Heating and Cooling for Cell Destruction

1. **Hyperthermic Ablation (>60°C): Coagulative Necrosis** Hyperthermic ablation techniques leverage intense heat to destroy tumor tissue. When temperatures within the tissue exceed 60°C, cellular proteins undergo rapid denaturation, and the plasma membrane of the cells melts. This leads to instantaneous or near-instantaneous cell death through a process known as **coagulative necrosis** [1].

• **Mechanism:** At temperatures up to 41°C, blood vessels dilate, and blood flow increases, initiating a heat shock response. This response, involving the production of heat shock proteins, can confer increased thermal resistance in cells that survive initial damage [4]. However, between 42°C and 46°C, irreversible cellular damage begins, leading to significant necrosis after approximately 10 minutes. Above 60°C, the destructive effects are immediate and profound, causing widespread cellular death [1].

2. **Hypothermic Ablation (<-40°C): Ice Crystal Formation and Osmotic Shock** Conversely, hypothermic ablation, or cryoablation, destroys cells by freezing them to temperatures below -40°C. The primary mechanisms of cell death in cryoablation involve the formation of ice crystals and osmotic shock [5].

• **Mechanism:** As tissue cools, cellular metabolism ceases. Ice crystals initially form in the extracellular space, leading to a hyperosmotic environment. This draws intracellular fluid out of the cells, causing dehydration. Upon thawing, a reversal of the osmotic gradient occurs, leading to an influx of extracellular fluid, cell swelling, and ultimately, membrane rupture [5]. Rapid cooling can also cause intracellular ice crystal formation, which expands the cell and leads to irreversible membrane damage. Cells closest to the cryoprobe experience rapid cooling and intracellular ice, while more peripheral cells are affected by osmotic shock [5].

Non-Thermal Ablation: Irreversible Electroporation (IRE)

Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) represents a distinct, ostensibly non-thermal ablation technique. Instead of relying on temperature extremes, IRE utilizes strong electrical currents to create permanent nanopores in the cell membrane, leading to programmed cell death or **apoptosis** [6].

• **Mechanism:** Short, high-voltage electrical pulses are delivered to the target tissue. These pulses induce a transmembrane potential that causes the formation of irreversible defects (nanopores) in the cell membrane. This disruption of cellular homeostasis triggers apoptosis, effectively destroying the cancer cells without significant thermal damage to the surrounding extracellular matrix, blood vessels, and bile ducts [6, 7]. This non-thermal nature is a key advantage, particularly for tumors located near critical structures that are sensitive to heat.

Key Oncology Ablation Modalities: A Technical Deep Dive

Several distinct modalities fall under the umbrella of oncology ablation, each employing unique physical principles to achieve tumor destruction.

A. Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA)

**Radiofrequency ablation (RFA)** is one of the most established thermal ablation techniques. It creates a localized electrical circuit within the body, using an oscillating electrical current to generate resistive heating in the tissues surrounding an interstitial electrode [8].

• **Working Principle:** Tissues, being poor electrical conductors, resist the flow of current. This resistance leads to ionic agitation and the production of frictional heat. The highest temperatures are generated closest to the electrode, with heat dissipating through thermal conduction to more distant tissues [8]. The circuit is typically completed by a dispersive electrode placed on the patient's skin (monopolar system) or by a second interstitial electrode (bipolar system).
• **Device Components:** RFA systems consist of a generator that produces the radiofrequency current and needle-like electrodes. These electrodes can be straight, multitined, or multitined expandable, designed to maximize tissue contact and distribute current over a larger volume, thereby increasing the ablation zone size [8].
• **Challenges:** RFA can be limited by the rapid increase in tissue electrical impedance as tissues dehydrate and char near 100°C. This charring effectively limits the flow of electrical current, making RFA a self-limiting process [9, 10].
• **Solutions:** To overcome these limitations, RFA systems often incorporate strategies such as internal cooling of the electrode with circulating water to reduce charring and improve current flow [11]. Impedance-controlled systems adjust power output to prevent excessive impedance, while power pulsing algorithms allow tissue to cool and rehydrate, facilitating greater energy deposition [12, 13].

B. Microwave Ablation (MWA)

**Microwave ablation (MWA)** utilizes electromagnetic energy in the microwave range (300 MHz–300 GHz) to generate heat within tissues through **dielectric hysteresis** [14].

• **Working Principle:** When microwave energy is applied, polar molecules, primarily water, continuously attempt to align with the rapidly oscillating electromagnetic field. Their inability to keep pace with this oscillation leads to energy absorption and rapid tissue heating. Tissues with high water content, such as the liver and kidney, are particularly susceptible to heating by MWA [14].
• **Advantages over RFA:** Unlike RFA, MWA is not an electrical current but a propagating electromagnetic field, making it effective in tissues with poor electrical conductance like bone, lung, and previously ablated tissue. Microwave fields can also overlap, allowing multiple applicators to be used simultaneously to create larger and more confluent ablation zones [14]. MWA is generally less susceptible to the **heat sink effect** from adjacent blood vessels compared to RFA due to its more efficient heating mechanism [63, 64].
• **Device Components:** MWA systems typically use straight, needle-like antennas operating at frequencies such as 915 MHz or 2.45 GHz. To prevent damage to healthy tissue along the antenna shaft, cooling mechanisms, such as water or CO2 gas cooling, are often integrated [24].

C. Laser Ablation (LA)

**Laser ablation (LA)**, also known as Laser-Induced Interstitial Thermotherapy (LITT), employs focused laser light to generate localized heat and destroy tumor cells [29, 30].

• **Working Principle:** Laser energy is absorbed by tissue, leading to a rapid temperature increase and subsequent coagulative necrosis. The depth and extent of ablation depend on the laser's wavelength, power, and exposure time, as well as the optical properties of the tissue [31, 32].
• **Applications:** LA has been used for various tumors, particularly in the liver, where precise, small ablations are required [29, 30].

D. High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU)

**High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound (HIFU)** is a non-invasive or minimally invasive technique that uses highly focused ultrasound waves to rapidly heat and destroy targeted tissue [35].

• **Working Principle:** HIFU operates at much higher intensities than diagnostic ultrasound. The focused acoustic energy is absorbed by the tissue, causing rapid ablative heating to cytotoxic levels. In addition to thermal effects, HIFU can induce mechanical effects, such as cavitation (formation and collapse of microbubbles), which can cause mechanical cell injury and contribute to tissue destruction [35, 36].
• **Device Types:** HIFU devices come in various forms: extracorporeal (non-invasive, used for superficial tumors), transrectal (for prostate cancer), interstitial, and percutaneous (for deeper lesions, still in early development) [37, 38].
• **Advantages:** The non-invasive nature of extracorporeal HIFU is a significant advantage, allowing treatment through intact skin or mucosa. HIFU can also be used for targeted drug or gene therapy by enhancing the delivery of therapeutic agents [41].
• **Limitations:** HIFU is most effective for superficial tumors due to limitations in ultrasound penetration. It is also susceptible to scatter and reflection, which can lead to unintended damage to adjacent tissues. Furthermore, its efficacy can be limited in areas affected by respiratory motion or overlying bone due to sonic shadowing [41, 42, 43].

E. Cryoablation

As discussed in the general principles, **cryoablation** destroys tumors by cooling them to cytotoxic temperatures. Modern cryoablation devices typically utilize the **Joule-Thomson effect** to achieve rapid cooling [44].

• **Working Principle:** High-pressure gas (e.g., argon) is allowed to expand rapidly within a small chamber at the distal tip of a cryoprobe. This rapid expansion causes a significant drop in temperature, often as low as -140°C, leading to the formation of an ice ball that encompasses and destroys the tumor [44].
• **Device Components:** Cryoablation systems consist of a console that controls gas flow and multiple cryoprobes, which are inserted into the tumor. The size and shape of the ice ball can be precisely monitored using imaging modalities like ultrasound, CT, and MRI [45].
• **Advantages:** A key benefit of cryoablation is the high visibility of the ice ball on imaging, allowing for precise monitoring of treatment progress and improved precision, especially near sensitive structures [45]. Healing after cryoablation may also be faster and more complete compared to hyperthermic ablation [47].
• **Challenges:** The lethal isotherm (the temperature at which cells are destroyed) lies *inside* the visible ice ball, requiring careful planning to ensure complete tumor coverage [45, 46]. Potential complications include **cryoshock** (a severe systemic reaction) and a higher risk of bleeding due to the lack of coagulation during the procedure [47, 49].

Tissue-Ablation Interactions: Factors Influencing Efficacy

The success and predictability of oncology ablation are significantly influenced by the complex interactions between the ablation energy and the surrounding tissue. Several fundamental tissue properties and physiological factors play a crucial role:

A. Tissue Properties

• **Electrical Conductivity:** Important for RFA and IRE. Tissues with high water and ion content (e.g., liver) transmit electrical current more effectively, while those with lower content (e.g., lung, fat) have higher electrical impedance. As RFA progresses, tissue dehydration and charring can increase impedance, limiting current flow [60].
• **Thermal Conductivity:** Determines how efficiently heat (or cold) is transferred through tissue. Tissues with higher thermal conductivity will distribute thermal energy more broadly.
• **Dielectric Permittivity:** Crucial for MWA, as it describes how a tissue interacts with an electromagnetic field. Tissues with high dielectric permittivity (high water content) absorb microwave energy more readily [60].
• **Heat Capacity:** The amount of energy required to raise the temperature of a given mass of tissue by one degree. Tissues with higher heat capacity require more energy for ablation.

B. Blood Perfusion Rate (Heat Sink Effect)

One of the most significant factors influencing thermal ablation is the **heat sink effect**, where adjacent blood vessels dissipate thermal energy, reducing the effective temperature within the ablation zone. This effect can lead to incomplete tumor destruction, particularly for tumors located near large vessels (>3 mm) [62].

• **Impact on Different Modalities:** MWA appears to be less susceptible to the heat sink effect compared to RFA and cryoablation, with studies showing less perivascular hepatocyte survival after MWA [63, 64]. Strategies to mitigate the heat sink effect include modulating hepatic perfusion (e.g., decreasing blood flow) or increasing the heating efficacy of the device [65, 66].

C. Specific Tissue Considerations

• **Lung Tissue:** Ablations in the lung present unique challenges. In addition to the heat sink from pulmonary vasculature, airflow due to respiration acts as a secondary heat sink. Aerated lung tissue can also act as an insulator, limiting the conductance of thermal and electrical energy, potentially leading to incomplete treatment. MWA, which does not rely on electrical current conductance, has shown advantages in lung ablations, producing larger ablation zones compared to RFA [27, 67, 68].

Modality Selection: Choosing the Right Tool

Selecting the most appropriate ablation modality is critical for treatment success and depends on several factors, including tumor size, location, tissue type, and patient comorbidities.

• **RFA:** Generally suitable for small tumors (<2 cm) in the liver and kidney. Its efficacy tends to decrease with larger tumor sizes [69, 70, 71, 72].
• **MWA:** Applicable to a broader spectrum of tissues, including lung, liver, kidney, and bone. Newer generation MWA systems may be more effective for larger tumors, though long-term clinical data are still emerging [14, 25, 26, 27, 28].
• **Cryoablation:** Commonly used for renal masses, metastatic tumors in the liver and bone, and increasingly for lung and breast tumors. Historically, it was contraindicated for primary liver tumors in patients with severe cirrhosis [49].
• **IRE:** Offers a theoretical advantage for perivascular tumors due to its non-thermal nature, preserving adjacent vessels and bile ducts [7]. However, it often requires precise parallel alignment of multiple applicators and general anesthesia with paralytics due to potential muscle contractions [53, 55, 56].
• **HIFU:** An attractive non-invasive option for stationary or superficial regions, such as the prostate or uterus, but its applicability in other organs is currently limited [39, 40, 41].

Conclusion

Oncology ablation devices represent a significant advancement in the treatment of various cancers, offering minimally invasive options that can precisely target and destroy tumors. From the thermal mechanisms of radiofrequency, microwave, and laser ablation to the cryo-induced cellular destruction and the non-thermal electroporation, each modality possesses unique technical principles, advantages, and limitations. The intricate interplay between ablation energy and tissue properties, coupled with factors like the heat sink effect, necessitates careful consideration in modality selection. As research and technological advancements continue, these devices will undoubtedly play an even more pivotal role in improving patient outcomes and expanding the therapeutic arsenal against cancer. The ongoing development of more efficient, precise, and versatile ablation technologies holds immense promise for the future of oncology. [74]

References

[1] Nikfarjam M, Muralidharan V, Christophi C. Mechanisms of focal heat destruction of liver tumors. J Surg Res. 2005:208–223. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2005.02.009. [4] Richter K, Haslbeck M, Buchner J. The heat shock response: Life on the verge of death. Mol Cell. 2010:253–266. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.10.006. [5] Gage AA, Baust J. Mechanisms of tissue injury in cryosurgery. Cryobiology. 1998:171–186. doi: 10.1006/cryo.1998.2115. [6] Lee EW, Thai S, Kee ST. Irreversible electroporation: A novel image-guided cancer therapy. Gut Liver. 2010;4(suppl 1):S99–S104. doi: 10.5009/gnl.2010.4.S1.S99. [7] Davalos RV, Mir IL, Rubinsky B. Tissue ablation with irreversible electroporation. Ann Biomed Eng. 2005;33:223–231. doi: 10.1007/s10439-005-8981-8. [8] Ahmed M, Brace CL, Lee FT, Jr, et al. Principles of and advances in percutaneous ablation. Radiology. 2011;2011:351–369. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10081634. [9] Livraghi T, Meloni F, Di Stasi M, et al. Sustained complete response and complications rates after radiofrequency ablation of very early hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhosis: Is resection still the treatment of choice? Hepatology. 2008;47:82–89. doi: 10.1002/hep.21933. [10] Gervais DA, McGovern FJ, Arellano RS, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of renal cell carcinoma: Part 1, Indications, results, and role in patient management over a 6-year period and ablation of 100 tumors. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:64–71. doi: 10.2214/ajr.185.1.01850064. [11] Goldberg SN, Gazelle GS, Solbiati L, et al. Radiofrequency tissue ablation: Increased lesion diameter with a perfusion electrode. Acad Radiol. 1996;3:636–644. doi: 10.1016/s1076-6332(96)80188-7. [12] Brace CL, Sampson LA, Hinshaw JL, et al. Radiofrequency ablation: Simultaneous application of multiple electrodes via switching creates larger, more confluent ablations than sequential application in a large animal model. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;20:118–124. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2008.09.021. [13] Lee JM, Han JK, Kim HC, et al. Multiple-electrode radiofrequency ablation of in vivo porcine liver: Comparative studies of consecutive monopolar, switching monopolar versus multipolar modes. Invest Radiol. 2007;42:676–683. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3180661aad. [14] Lubner MG, Brace CL, Hinshaw JL, et al. Microwave tumor ablation: Mechanism of action, clinical results, and devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21(suppl 8):S192–S203. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2010.04.007. [24] Knavel EM, Hinshaw JL, Lubner MG, et al. High-powered gas-cooled microwave ablation: Shaft cooling creates an effective stick function without altering the ablation zone. Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198:W260–W265. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.6503. [27] Durick NA, Laeseke PF, Broderick LS, et al. Microwave ablation with triaxial antennas tuned for lung: Results in an in vivo porcine model. Radiology. 2008;247:80–87. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2471062123. [28] Brace CL. Radiofrequency and microwave ablation of the liver, lung, kidney, and bone: What are the differences? Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2009;38:135–143. doi: 10.1067/j.cpradiol.2007.10.001. [29] Gough-Palmer AL, Gedroyc WM. Laser ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma—A review. World J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:7170–7174. doi: 10.3748/wjg.14.7170. [30] Pacella CM, Francica G, Di Costanzo GG. Laser ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiol Res Pract. 2011;2011:595627. doi: 10.1155/2011/595627. [31] Veenendaal LM, de Jager A, Stapper G, et al. Multiple fiber laser-induced thermotherapy for ablation of large intrahepatic tumors. Photomed Laser Surg. 2006;24:3–9. doi: 10.1089/pho.2006.24.3. [32] Steger AC, Lees WR, Shorvon P, et al. Multiple-fibre low-power interstitial laser hyperthermia: Studies in the normal liver. Br J Surg. 1992;79:139–145. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800790215. [35] Zhou YF. High intensity focused ultrasound in clinical tumor ablation. World J Clin Oncol. 2011;2:8–27. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v2.i1.8. [36] Tezel A, Mitragotri S. Interactions of inertial cavitation bubbles with stratum corneum lipid bilayers during low-frequency sonophoresis. Biophys J. 2003;85:3502–3512. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(03)74770-5. [37] Deardorff DL, Diederich CJ. Axial control of thermal coagulation using a multi-element interstitial ultrasound applicator with internal cooling. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 2000;47:170–178. doi: 10.1109/58.818759. [38] Kinsey AM, Tyreus PD, Rieke V, et al. Interstitial ultrasound applicators with dynamic angular control for thermal ablation of tumors under MR-guidance. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2004;4:2496–2499. doi: 10.1109/IEMBS.2004.1403719. [39] Ren X-L, Zhou X-D, Yan R-L, et al. Sonographically guided extracorporeal ablation of uterine fibroids with high-intensity focused ultrasound: Midterm results. J Ultrasound Med. 2009;28:100–103. doi: 10.7863/jum.2009.28.1.100. [40] Taran FA, Tempany CM, Regan L, et al. Magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) compared with abdominal hysterectomy for treatment of uterine leiomyomas. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;34:572–578. doi: 10.1002/uog.7435. [41] Kim YS, Rhim H, Choi MJ, et al. High-intensity focused ultrasound therapy: An overview for radiologists. Korean J Radiol. 2008;9:291–302. doi: 10.3348/kjr.2008.9.4.291. [42] Li JJ, Xu GL, Gu MF, et al. Complications of high intensity focused ultrasound in patients with recurrent and metastatic abdominal tumors. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:2747–2751. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i19.2747. [43] Roberts WW, Hall TL, Ives K, et al. Pulsed cavitational ultrasound: A noninvasive technology for controlled tissue ablation (histotripsy) in the rabbit kidney. J Urol. 2006;175:734–738. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00141-2. [44] Kim C, O’Rourke AP, Mahvi DM, et al. Finite-element analysis of ex vivo and in vivo hepatic cryoablation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2007;54:1177–1185. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2006.889775. [45] Georgiades C, Rodriguez R, Azene E, et al. Determination of the nonlethal margin inside the visible “ice-ball” during percutaneous cryoablation of renal tissue. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013;36:783–790. doi: 10.1007/s00270-012-0470-5. [46] Littrup PJ, Jallad B, Vorugu V, et al. Lethal isotherms of cryoablation in a phantom study: Effects of heat load, probe size, and number. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;20:1343–1351. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2009.05.038. [47] Lee FT, Jr, Mahvi DM, Chosy SG, et al. Hepatic cryosurgery with intraoperative US guidance. Radiology. 1997;202:624–632. doi: 10.1148/radiology.202.3.9051005. [49] Seifert JK, Morris DL. World survey on the complications of hepatic and prostate cryotherapy. World J Surg. 1999;23:109–113. doi: 10.1007/pl00013173. [53] Adeyanju OO, Al-Angari HM, Sahakian AV. The optimization of needle electrode number and placement for irreversible electroporation of hepatocellular carcinoma. Radiol Oncol. 2012;46:126–135. doi: 10.2478/v10019-012-0026-y. [55] Thomson KR, Cheung W, Ellis SJ, et al. Investigation of the safety of irreversible electroporation in humans. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011:611–621. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2010.12.014. [56] Martin RC, 2nd, McFarland K, Ellis S, et al. Irreversible electroporation therapy in the management of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2012:361–369. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.05.021. [60] Wang P, Brace CL. Tissue dielectric measurement using an interstitial dipole antenna. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2012;59:115–121. doi: 10.1109/TBME.2011.2167622. [62] Lu DS, Raman SS, Limanond P, et al. Influence of large peritumoral vessels on outcome of radiofrequency ablation of liver tumors. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14:1267–1274. doi: 10.1097/01.rvi.0000092666.72261.6b. [63] Bhardwaj N, Strickland AD, Ahmad F, et al. A comparative histological evaluation of the ablations produced by microwave, cryotherapy and radiofrequency in the liver. Pathology. 2009;41:168–172. doi: 10.1080/00313020802579292. [64] Yu NC, Raman SS, Kim YJ, et al. Microwave liver ablation: Influence of hepatic vein size on heat-sink effect in a porcine model. J Vasc Interv Radiol United States. 2008;19:1087–1092. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2008.03.023. [65] Goldberg SN, Hahn PF, Tanabe KK, et al. Percutaneous radio-frequency tissue ablation: Does perfusion-mediated tissue cooling limit coagulation necrosis? J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1998;9:101–111. doi: 10.1016/s1051-0443(98)70491-9. [66] Aschoff AJ, Merkle EM, Wong V, et al. How does alteration of hepatic blood flow affect liver perfusion and radiofrequency-induced thermal lesion size in rabbit liver? J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;13:57–63. doi: 10.1002/1522-2586(200101)13:1<57::aid-jmri1009>3.0.co;2-n. [67] Morrison PR, vanSonnenberg E, Shankar S, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of thoracic lesions: Part 1, experiments in the normal porcine thorax. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:375–380. doi: 10.2214/ajr.184.2.01840375. [68] Steinke K, Glenn D, King J, et al. Percutaneous pulmonary radio-frequency ablation: Difficulty achieving complete ablations in big lung lesions. Br J Radiol. 2003;76:742–745. doi: 10.1259/bjr/35823935. [69] Van Tilborg AA, Meijerink MR, Sietses C, et al. Long-term results of radiofrequency ablation for unresectable colorectal liver metastases: A potentially curative intervention. Br J Radiol. 2011;84:556–565. doi: 10.1259/bjr/78268814. [70] Kuvshinoff BW, Ota DM. Radiofrequency ablation of liver tumors: Influence of technique and tumor size. Surgery. 2002;132:605–611. doi: 10.1067/msy.2002.127545. [71] Gervais DA, Arellano RS, McGovern FJ, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of renal cell carcinoma: Part 2, Lessons learned with ablation of 100 tumors. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:72–80. doi: 10.2214/ajr.185.1.01850072. [72] Best SL, Park SK, Yaacoub RF, et al. Long-term outcomes of renal tumor radio frequency ablation stratified by tumor diameter: Size matters. J Urol. 2012;187:1183–1189. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.11.096. [74] Brace C. Thermal tumor ablation in clinical use. IEEE Pulse. 2011;2:28–38. doi: 10.1109/MPUL.2011.942603.