# Comparative Study of Minimally Invasive Microwave Ablation Applicators
## 3 Results
### Quantitative Comparison of Ablation Performance Across Applicators Under Standardized Conditions
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Design**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Maximum Temperature** (\({}^{\circ}\)C)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Ablation Diameter/d\({}_{1}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Ablation Length/d\({}_{2}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Aspect Ratio**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Figure,** **References**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{5-8}  & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** \\ \hline Monopole & 142 & 160.7 & 18.3 & 18.4 & 28 & 30.6 & 1.53 & 1.66 & Figure 1a, [43] \\ \hline Capacitive capped monopole & 145.1 & 117.1 & 30.3 & 34.8 & 22.1 & 21.2 & 0.73 & 0.61 & Figure 1b, [44] \\ \hline Multi-slot & 84.8 & 79.45 & 26.9 & 31.4 & 32.8 & 29.6 & 1.22 & 0.94 & Figure 1c, [21] \\ \hline Dual-slot & 143.9 & 96.9 & 22 & 18.8 & 25.5 & 25.5 & 1.16 & 1.36 & Figure 1d, [45] \\ \hline Triaxial & 76.8 & 68.6 & 23.2 & 23.7 & 40.6 & 38.7 & 1.75 & 1.63 & Figure 1e, [47] \\ \hline Choke dipole & 86.1 & 79.7 & 26.3 & 26.6 & 32.2 & 32.2 & 1.22 & 1.21 & Figure 1f, [47] \\ \hline Balun-free base-fed monopole & 121.3 & 124.6 & 27.9 & 28.1 & 26.4 & 26.2 & 0.95 & 0.93 & Figure 1g, [47] \\ \hline FSD & 95.2 & 74.1 & 24.4 & 27.4 & 35.8 & 31.3 & 1.47 & 1.14 & Figure 1h, [46] \\ \hline Balun-free helical dipole & 116.2 & 98.1 & 22.9 & 28.4 & 32.6 & 33.8 & 1.42 & 1.19 & Figure 1i, [48] \\ \hline Helical open waveguide & 187 & 150.3 & 18.9 & 19 & 17.5 & 16.9 & 0.93 & 0.89 & Figure 1j, [41] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Comparison of all designs as aware of maximum temperature, ablation zone, and aspect ratio (in all cases, the absorbed power deposited in the tissues was the same and equal to 40 W). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Design**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Deposited**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Maximum**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Ablation**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Ablation**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Aspect Ratio**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Figure,**} \\  & **Power (W)** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Temperature (\(\lx@sectionsign\)C)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Diameter/d\({}_{1}\) (mm)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Length/d\({}_{2}\) (mm)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**(d\({}_{3}\)/d\({}_{1}\))**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Figure,**} \\  & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** & **HM** & **TCM** \\ \hline Monopole & 25 & 20 & 102.5 & 98.4 & 14.9 & 12.9 & 22.4 & 20.3 & 1.5 & 1.57 & Figure 1a, [43] \\ \hline Capacitive capped & \multirow{2}{*}{20} & \multirow{2}{*}{30} & \multirow{2}{*}{93.3} & \multirow{2}{*}{100.4} & \multirow{2}{*}{23.7} & \multirow{2}{*}{3  
Figure 9 illustrates, through schematic representations, the results presented in Table 5. It is observed that the 50 \({}^{\circ}\)C isothermal line encloses the 3 cm or 2 cm tumor diameter in all cases. However, only the open waveguide (Figure 9) restricts the 38 \({}^{\circ}\)C isothermal to only 1 cm beyond the tumor boundary as desired to avoid healthy tissue damage. Finally, Table 5 presents the 38 \({}^{\circ}\)C penetration zone for all applicators and the deviation of this zone from the tumor, providing a quantitative assessment of the uncontrolled temperature distribution. Specifically, the extension of the 38 \({}^{\circ}\)C isothermal beyond the tumor's diameter (2 cm or 3 cm) is calculated by subtracting the tumor's dimensions from the isothermal's length (horizontal axis) and diameter (vertical axis).