Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29687261›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2018

Conductivity Rise During Irreversible Electroporation: True Permeabilization or Heat?

Alette H Ruarus, Laurien G P H Vroomen, Robbert S Puijk, Hester J Scheffer, Theo J C Faes, Martijn R Meijerink

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. PIRET-A Platform for Treatment Planning in Electroporation-Based Therapies.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Liver metastases.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alette H RuarusDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. a.ruarus@vumc.nl.
Laurien G P H VroomenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Robbert S PuijkDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Hester J SchefferDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Theo J C FaesDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Martijn R MeijerinkDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIrreversible electroporation (IRE) induces apoptosis with high-voltage electric pulses. Although the working mechanism is non-thermal, development of secondary Joule heating occurs. This study investigated whether the observed conductivity rise during IRE is caused by increased cellular permeabilization or heat development.

methodsIRE was performed in a gelatin tissue phantom, in potato tubers, and in 30 patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Continuous versus sequential pulsing protocols (10-90 vs. 10-30-30-30) were assessed. Temperature was measured using fiber-optic probes. After temperature had returned to baseline, 100 additional pulses were delivered. The primary technique efficacy of the treated CRLM was compared to the periprocedural current rise. Seven patients received ten additional pulses after a 10-min cool-down period.

resultsTemperature and current rise was higher for the continuous pulsing protocol (medians, gel: 13.05 vs. 9.55 °C and 9 amperes (A) vs. 7A; potato: 12.70 vs. 10.53 °C and 6.0A vs. 6.5A). After cooling-down, current returned to baseline in the gel phantom and near baseline values (Δ2A with continuous- and Δ5A with sequential pulsing) in the potato tubers. The current declined after cooling-down in all seven patients with CRLM, although baseline values were not reached. There was a positive correlation between current rise and primary technique efficacy (p = 0.02); however, the previously reported current increase threshold of 12-15A was reached in 13%.

conclusionThe observed conductivity rise during IRE is caused by both cellular permeabilization and heat development. Although a correlation between current rise and efficacy exists, the current increase threshold seems unfeasible for CRLM.

Indexed as

Hot TemperatureElectroporationFemaleGelatinHumansIn Vitro TechniquesLiver NeoplasmsMaleNecrosisPermeabilityProspective StudiesSolanum tuberosumGelatinConductivityIREIrreversible electroporationPermeabilizationTemperature

Identifiers

PMID29687261
PMCPMC6021471
OpenAlexW2799346665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.