Table 1 Comparison between ablative techniques in lung ablation
From: Image-guided percutaneous ablation for the treatment of lung malignancies: current state of the art
| RFA | MWA | CA | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mechanism | Electric current | Electromagnetic field | Argon gas |
| Temperature | 60–100° C | 60-150° C | Sub-zero |
| Ablation zone size | 3 cm | 6 cm | Less than heat-based modalities |
| Applicators | Single probe: straight or expandable | Single or multiple probes, straight or with one to three loops | Single or multiple probes (2–3) |
| Advantages |
Widely available and proven Lung is highly susceptible |
Uniform ablation zone Larger ablated area No heat-sink effect |
Suitable for lesions near large vessels or perihilar Less painful |
| Disadvantages |
Not recommended near large vessels or pulmonary hilum Interferes with the heart's conduction system |
Superiority to RFA has not been proven It may cause a higher complication rate |
Increased difficulty May cause more lung bleeding |
| Ideal patient |
Peripheral tumor, < 3 cm No pacemaker |
Peripheral or central tumors Lesion can be > 3 cm It can be used with pacemakers |
Peripheral or central lesion can be > 3 cm No bleeding risk factors |