{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026517383618149676, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016499705362404242, 'mean_word_length': 4.957894736842105, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Real‐time MR temperature mapping of rabbit liver in vivo during thermal ablation

It has been shown that quantitative MRI thermometry using the proton resonance frequency (PRF) method can be used to noninvasively monitor the evolution of tissue temperature, and to guide minimally‐invasive tumor ablation based on local hyperthermia. Although hepatic tumors are among the main targets for thermal ablation, PRF‐based temperature MRI of the liver is difficult to perform because of motion artifacts, fat content, and low T  *2 . In this study the stability of real‐time thermometry was tested on a clinical 1.5 T scanner for rabbit liver in vivo. The fast segmented EPI principle was used together with respiratory gating to limit respiratory motion artifacts. Lipid signal suppression was achieved with a binomial excitation pulse. Saturation slabs were applied to suppress artifacts due to flowing blood. The respiratory‐gated MR thermometry in the rabbit liver in vivo showed a standard deviation (SD) of 1–3°C with a temporal resolution of 3 s per slice and 1.4 mm × 1.9 mm spatial resolution in plane (slice thickness = 5 mm). The method was used to guide thermal ablation experiments with a clinical infrared laser. The estimated size of the necrotic area, based on the thermal dose calculated from MR temperature maps, corresponded well with the actual lesion size determined by histology and conventional MR images obtained 5 days posttreatment. These results show that quantitative MR temperature mapping can be obtained in the liver in vivo, and can be used for real‐time control of thermal ablation and for lesion size prediction. Magn Reson Med 50:322–330, 2003. © 2003 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.