Electrical Conductivity Measurement in Human Liver Tissue: Assessment on Normal vs. Tumor Tissue and under In Vivo vs. Ex Vivo Conditions

Biosensors Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.3390/bios14080382
Amirhossein Sarreshtehdari, Tomás García-Sánchez, P. Sánchez-Velázquez, Benedetto Ielpo, Enrique Berjano, María Villamonte, Xavier Moll, F. Burdío
{"title":"Electrical Conductivity Measurement in Human Liver Tissue: Assessment on Normal vs. Tumor Tissue and under In Vivo vs. Ex Vivo Conditions","authors":"Amirhossein Sarreshtehdari, Tomás García-Sánchez, P. Sánchez-Velázquez, Benedetto Ielpo, Enrique Berjano, María Villamonte, Xavier Moll, F. Burdío","doi":"10.3390/bios14080382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study evaluated electrical conductivity in human liver tissue in the 3–1000 kHz frequency range to compare normal versus tumor tissues under in vivo versus ex vivo conditions. Methods: Previous informed consent was obtained from twenty patients undergoing liver resection in whom liver electrical conductivity was measured during surgery and after resection. Result: We found higher electrical conductivity values in tumor tissues than in normal tissue in both in vivo (0.41 ± 0.10 vs. 0.13 ± 0.06 S/m) and ex vivo (0.27 ± 0.09 vs. 0.12 ± 0.07 S/m) conditions (at 3 kHz). The electric properties also showed a promising potential for distinguishing between different tissue types including metastasis, cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), hepatic cirrhosis, and normal liver (both in vivo and ex vivo). At 3 kHz, in vivo electrical conductivity for cholangiocarcinoma, HCC, and metastasis were 0.35, 0.42 ± 0.13, and 0.41 ± 0.08 S/m, respectively, which differed significantly from each other (p < 0.05). Conclusions: These findings could potentially improve liver disease diagnostics through electrical conductivity measurements and treatment techniques involving electric fields. Future research should focus on expanding the sample size to refine the categorization and comparison processes across diverse human liver tissue types.","PeriodicalId":100185,"journal":{"name":"Biosensors","volume":"53 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosensors","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/bios14080382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study evaluated electrical conductivity in human liver tissue in the 3–1000 kHz frequency range to compare normal versus tumor tissues under in vivo versus ex vivo conditions. Methods: Previous informed consent was obtained from twenty patients undergoing liver resection in whom liver electrical conductivity was measured during surgery and after resection. Result: We found higher electrical conductivity values in tumor tissues than in normal tissue in both in vivo (0.41 ± 0.10 vs. 0.13 ± 0.06 S/m) and ex vivo (0.27 ± 0.09 vs. 0.12 ± 0.07 S/m) conditions (at 3 kHz). The electric properties also showed a promising potential for distinguishing between different tissue types including metastasis, cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), hepatic cirrhosis, and normal liver (both in vivo and ex vivo). At 3 kHz, in vivo electrical conductivity for cholangiocarcinoma, HCC, and metastasis were 0.35, 0.42 ± 0.13, and 0.41 ± 0.08 S/m, respectively, which differed significantly from each other (p < 0.05). Conclusions: These findings could potentially improve liver disease diagnostics through electrical conductivity measurements and treatment techniques involving electric fields. Future research should focus on expanding the sample size to refine the categorization and comparison processes across diverse human liver tissue types.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人体肝组织电导率测量:正常组织与肿瘤组织以及体内与体外条件下的评估
背景:本研究评估了人体肝脏组织在 3-1000 kHz 频率范围内的导电性,以比较体内和体外条件下正常组织和肿瘤组织的导电性。研究方法事先征得 20 名接受肝脏切除术的患者的知情同意,在手术过程中和切除术后测量其肝脏电导率。结果我们发现在体内(0.41 ± 0.10 vs. 0.13 ± 0.06 S/m)和体外(0.27 ± 0.09 vs. 0.12 ± 0.07 S/m)条件下(3 kHz),肿瘤组织的电导率值均高于正常组织。电特性还显示了区分不同组织类型的潜力,包括转移瘤、胆管癌(CCA)、肝细胞癌(HCC)、肝硬化和正常肝脏(体内和体外)。在 3 kHz 频率下,胆管癌、HCC 和转移瘤的体内导电率分别为 0.35、0.42 ± 0.13 和 0.41 ± 0.08 S/m,它们之间存在显著差异(p < 0.05)。结论这些发现有可能通过电导率测量和涉及电场的治疗技术改善肝病诊断。未来的研究应侧重于扩大样本量,以完善不同人体肝脏组织类型的分类和比较过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy-Based Microfluidic Biosensor Using Cell-Imprinted Polymers for Bacteria Detection Ultrasensitive Electrochemical Biosensors Based on Allosteric Transcription Factors (aTFs) for Pb2+ Detection Salmonella Detection in Food Using a HEK-hTLR5 Reporter Cell-Based Sensor Paper-Based Microfluidic Device for Extracellular Lactate Detection Recent Electrochemical Advancements for Liquid-Biopsy Nucleic Acid Detection for Point-of-Care Prostate Cancer Diagnostics and Prognostics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1