Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Protective and Heat Retention Effects of Thermo-sensitive Basement Membrane Extract (Matrigel) in Hepatic Radiofrequency Ablation in an Experimental Animal Study

  • Laboratory Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the protective effect of using thermo-sensitive basement membrane extract (Matrigel) for hydrodissection to minimize thermal injury to nearby structures and to evaluate its heat sink effect on the ablation zone in radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the liver.

Materials and Methods

First, the viscosity profile and heat sink effect of Matrigel were assessed during RFA in vitro and ex vivo. Fresh pig liver tissue was used, and the temperature changes in Matrigel and in 5% dextrose in water (D5W) during RFA were recorded. Then, the size of the ablation zone in the peripheral liver after RFA was measured. Second, in an in vivo study, 45 Sprague–Dawley rats were divided into three groups of 15 rats each (Matrigel, D5W and control). In the experimental groups, artificial ascites with 10 ml of Matrigel or D5W were injected using ultrasound guidance prior to RFA. The frequency of thermal injury to the nearby organs was compared among the three groups, with assessments of several locations: near the diaphragm, the abdominal wall and the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Finally, the biological degradation of Matrigel by ultrasound was evaluated over 60 days.

Results

First, Matrigel produced a greater heat retention (less heat sink) effect than D5W during ex vivo ablation (63 ± 9 vs. 26 ± 6 °C at 1 min on the surface of the liver, P < 0.001). Hepatic ablation zone volume did not differ between the two groups. Second, thermal injury to the nearby structures was found in 14 of 15 cases (93.3%) in the control group, 8 of 15 cases (53.3%) in the D5W group, and 1 of 15 cases (6.7%) in the Matrigel group. Significant differences in the thermal injury rates for nearby structures were detected among the three groups (P < 0.001). The most significant difference in the thermal injury rate was found in locations near the GI tract (P = 0.003). Finally, Matrigel that was injected in vivo was gradually degraded during the following 60 days.

Conclusions

Using thermo-sensitive Matrigel as a hydrodissection material might help reduce the frequency of collateral thermal injury to nearby structures, especially in locations close to the GI tract, compared to conventional D5W. Additionally, Matrigel did not increase the heat sink effect on the ablation zone during ablation and was degraded over time in vivo.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gao J, Wang SH, Ding XM, et al. Radiofrequency ablation for single hepatocellular carcinoma 3 cm or less as first-line treatment. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(17):5287–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Yan K, Chen MH, Yang W, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: long-term outcome and prognostic factors. Eur J Radiol. 2008;67:336–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee YH, Hsu CY, Chu CW, et al. Radiofrequency ablation is better than surgical resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma within the Milan criteria and preserved liver function: a retrospective study using propensity score analyses. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2015;49(3):242–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yang W, Yan K, Goldberg SN, et al. Ten-year survival of hepatocellular carcinoma patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation as a first-line treatment. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22(10):2993–3005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Solbiati L, Ahmed M, Cova L, Ierace T, Brioschi M, Goldberg SN. Small liver colorectal metastases treated with percutaneous radiofrequency ablation: local response rate and long-term survival with up to 10-year follow-up. Radiology. 2012;265:958–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen MH, Wei Y, Yan K, et al. Treatment strategy to optimize radiofrequency ablation for liver malignancies. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17:671–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Osaki Y, Nishikawa H. Treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan over the last three decades: our experience and published work review. Hepatol Res. 2015;45(1):59–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim JW, Shin SS, Heo SH, et al. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of liver tumors: how we do it safely and completely. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16(6):1226–39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Farrell MA, Charboneau JW, Callstrom MR, Reading CC, Engan DE, Blute ML. Paranephric water instillation: a technique to prevent bowel injury during percutaneous renal radiofrequency ablation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:1315–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Rhim H, Lim HK, Kim YS, Choi D. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation with artificial ascites for hepatocellular carcinoma in the hepatic dome: initial experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:91–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Raman SS, Aziz D, Chang X, Sayre J, Lassman C, Lu D. Minimizing diaphragmatic injury during radiofrequency ablation: efficacy of intraabdominal carbon dioxide insufflation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183:197–200.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yamakado K, Nakatsuka A, Akeboshi M, Takeda K. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of liver neoplasms adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract after balloon catheter interposition. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14(9 Pt 1):1183–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kleinman HK, Martin GR. Matrigel: basement membrane matrix with biological activity. Semin Cancer Biol. 2005;15:378–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vukicevic S, Kleinman HK, Luyten FP, Roberts AB, Roche NS, Reddi AH. Identification of multiple active growth factors in basement membrane Matrigel suggests caution in interpretation of cellular activity related to extracellular matrix components. Exp Cell Res. 1992;202:1–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fu JJ, Wang S, Guan RH, Yang W, Yan K, Chen MH. Effect of thermo-sensitive Matrigel on minimization of thermal injury to the nearby structures in radiofrequency ablation of subcapsular hepatic tumors in a rat model. Natl Med J China. 2016;96:43–7. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2016.01.010 PMID: 26792607.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Livraghi T, Solbiati L, Meloni MF, Gazelle GS, Halpern EF, Goldberg SN. Treatment of focal liver tumors with percutaneous radio-frequency ablation: complications encountered in a multicenter study. Radiology. 2003;226:441–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. de Baere T, Risse O, Kuoch V, et al. Adverse events during radiofrequency treatment of 582 hepatic tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181:695–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dodd GD 3rd, Soulen MC, Kane RA, et al. Minimally invasive treatment of malignant hepatic tumors: at the threshold of a major breakthrough. RadioGraphics. 2000;20:9–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Raman SS, Lu DS, Vodopich DJ, Sayre J, Lassman C. Minimizing diaphragmatic injury during radio-frequency ablation: efficacy of subphrenic peritoneal saline injection in a porcine model. Radiology. 2002;222:819–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rhim H. Complications of radiofrequency ablation in hepatocellular carcinoma. Abdom Imaging. 2005;30:409–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ishikawa T, Kubota T, Horigome R, et al. Radiofrequency ablation during continuous saline infusion can extend ablation margins. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19(8):1278–82.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Hasegawa T, Takaki H, Miyagi H, et al. Hyaluronic acid gel injection to prevent thermal injury of adjacent gastrointestinal tract during percutaneous liver radiofrequency ablation. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2013;36:1144–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Langen HJ, Jochims M, Gunther RW. Artificial displacement of kidneys, spleen, and colon by injection of physiologic saline and CO2 as an aid to percutaneous procedures: experimental results. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1995;6(3):411–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Song I, Rhim H, Lim HK, Kim YS, Choi D. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma abutting the diaphragm and gastrointestinal tracts with the use of artificial ascites: safety and technical efficacy in 143 patients. Eur Radiol. 2009;19:2630–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Laeseke PF, Sampson LA, Brace CL, Winter TC III, Fine JP, Lee FT Jr. Unintended thermal injuries from radiofrequency ablation: protection with 5% dextrose in water. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186(5 Suppl):S249–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chen EA, Neeman Z, Lee FT, Kam A, Wood B. Thermal protection with 5% dextrose solution blanket during radiofrequency ablation. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol. 2006;29:1093–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hughes CS, Postovit LM, Lajoie GA. Matrigel: a complex protein mixture required for optimal growth of cell culture. Proteomics. 2010;10:1886–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Benton G, George J, Kleinman HK, Arnaoutova IP. Advancing science and technology via 3D culture on basement membrane matrix. J Cell Physiol. 2009;221:18–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Arnaoutova I, George J, Kleinman HK, Benton G. The endothelial cell tube formation assay on basement membrane turns 20. Angiogenesis. 2009;12:267–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Lu DS, Raman SS, Vodopich DJ, Wang M, Sayre J, Lassman C. Effect of vessel size on creation of hepatic radiofrequency lesions in pigs: assessment of the “heat sink” effect. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178:47–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kim SK, Lim HK, Ryu JA, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of rabbit liver in vivo: effect of the pringle maneuver on pathologic changes in liver surrounding the ablation zone. Korean J Radiol. 2004;5:240–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim YS, Rhim H, Paik SS. Radiofrequency ablation of the liver in a rabbit model: creation of artificial ascites to minimize collateral thermal injury to the diaphragm and stomach. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17:541–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hinshaw JL, Laeseke PF, Winter TC 3rd, Kliewer MA, Fine JP, Lee FT Jr. Radiofrequency ablation of peripheral liver tumors: intraperitoneal 5% dextrose in water decreases postprocedural pain. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:S306–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Brace CL, Laeseke PF, Prasad V, Lee FT. Electrical isolation during radiofrequency ablation: 5% dextrose in water provides better protection than saline. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2002;28:5021–4.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kondo Y, Yoshida H, Shiina S, Tateishi R, Teratani T, Omata M. Artificial ascites technique for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of liver cancer adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. Br J Surg. 2006;93:1277–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bodily KD, Atwell TD, Mandrekar JN, et al. Hydrodisplacement in the percutaneous cryoablation of 50 renal tumors. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:779–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lee EJ, Rhim H, Lim HK, Choi D, Lee WJ, Min KS. Effect of artificial ascites on thermal injury to the diaphragm and stomach in radiofrequency ablation of the liver: experimental study with a porcine model. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190:1659–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was founded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81471768) and the National Natural Science Foundation of Beijing (No. 7152031).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Department of Ultrasound, Peking University Cancer Hospital, Beijing, 100142, China

    Jing-Jing Fu, Song Wang, Wei Yang, An-Na Jiang, Kun Yan & Min-Hua Chen

  2. State Key Laboratory of Toxicology and Medical Countermeasures, Beijing Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Beijing, 100850, China

    Wei Gong

Authors
  1. Jing-Jing Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Song Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wei Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wei Gong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. An-Na Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Kun Yan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Min-Hua Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Yang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fu, JJ., Wang, S., Yang, W. et al. Protective and Heat Retention Effects of Thermo-sensitive Basement Membrane Extract (Matrigel) in Hepatic Radiofrequency Ablation in an Experimental Animal Study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40, 1077–1085 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-017-1617-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-017-1617-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation