## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Concentration** \\ **of IONP** \\ **(mg/mL)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Time to Reach 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C (s)** \\ **AGAROSE** \\ **Solvent** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **CHTOSAN** \\ **Solvent** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **AGAROSE** \\ **Solvent** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **CHITOSAN** \\ **Solvent** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **AGAROSE** \\ **Solvent** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **CHITOSAN** \\ **Solvent** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \hline
0 & 5.58 & 6.48 & 14.94 & 16.53 & 133.03 & 136.11 \\
1 & 6.09 & 7.11 & 17.15 & 18.21 & 130.60 & 143.27 \\
2 & 4.53 & 7.77 & 13.14 & 19.44 & 139.36 & 137.67 \\
3 & 7.08 & 6.48 & 16.53 & 19.17 & 124.98 & 130.94 \\
4 & 7.44 & 7.38 & 22.14 & 18.90 & 122.33 & 129.80 \\
5 & 5.37 & 6.96 & 15.75 & 18.96 & 141.88 & 135.27 \\
6 & 5.52 & 6.75 & 15.18 & 19.08 & 138.60 & 137.99 \\
7 & 5.61 & 6.66 & 14.73 & 21.78 & 136.50 & 133.02 \\
8 & 5.76 & 7.50 & 16.38 & 19.80 & 130.16 & 149.56 \\
9 & 5.61 & 7.11 & 16.05 & 18.24 & 126.62 & 135.89 \\
10 & 5.19 & 7.26 & 13.56 & 19.86 & 134.99 & 137.19 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: The relation between the concentration of iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles (IONPs), time, and temperature obtained during radiofrequency thermal ablation (RFTA). Figure 8: The thermal map obtained during the thermal ablation of the porcine liver when 5 mg/mL iron oxide nanoparticles dispersed in agarose were employed, where t\({}_{60}\)—time needed to reach the temperature 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C; t\({}_{100}\)—time needed to reach the temperature 100 \({}^{\circ}\)C; d\({}_{42}\)—the ablated area when the temperature reached 42 \({}^{\circ}\)C; and d\({}_{60}\)—the ablated area when the temperature reached 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C.  
According to the summarized data of the temperature increase over time, the maximum temperature increment recorded was 149 \({}^{\circ}\)C for iron oxide nanoparticles dispersed in chitosan solvent with a concentration of 8 mg/mL. However, the experimental results demonstrated that nanoparticles dispersed in agarose solvent presented a better performance and heating effect compared to the chitosan solvent at the same concentrations. For instance, as shown in Table 2, the time to reach 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C is quicker for IONPs at the concentration of 5 mg/mL in agarose solvent compared to the same concentration of IONPs in the chitosan solvent. In addition, the maximum temperature reached by IONPs at the concentration of 5 mg/mL in chitosan solvent was 135.27 \({}^{\circ}\)C during RFTA while the IONPs dispersed in agarose solvent performed better and showed the maximum temperature of about 142 \({}^{\circ}\)C.  
The area of tumor ablation is considered one of the main challenges during thermal ablation therapy. Figure 9 presents the values of the ablated diameters achieved at 42 \({}^{\circ}\)C (t\({}_{\text{2}}\)) for all 10 concentrations and both solvents. The ablation diameter achieved by iron oxide nanoparticles for chitosan and agarose solvents reached approximately 3 cm as can be seen from Figure 9.  
Figure 10 demonstrates the comparative chart of the ablated diameter achieved during radiofrequency ablation when the temperature increment reached 60 \({}^{\circ}\)C (t\({}_{\text{60}}\)). The chart includes broad information regarding the influence of concentration in 10 replicates for both solvents at t\({}_{\text{60}}\). The maximum diameter achieved during the ablation process was approximately 2.5 cm.