One of the key challenges associated with safely and eectively implementing these therapies is spatiotemporal control of the induced temperature changes. is challenge is usually addressed by a combination of therapy planning and monitoring, the specic implementation of which is oen tailored to the treatment modality and site of therapy. Generally, treatment planning is the use of models and simulation of the delivery of energy and resulting heating to aid in optimizing the logistical approach to therapy delivery, such as location of applicators and applied power. In most cases, patient-specic imaging is incorporated to better incorporate patient-specic anatomy and characterize the target tissue. However, while an excellent tool for optimizing the approach to therapy delivery, in most cases the

complexities of modeling and simulating the heat deposition in tissue do not accurately predict outcomes or fully assure patient safety. erefore, in order to increase the ecacy of these procedures as well as enhance the safety aspects of delivery, feedback of the therapy is oen necessary for many of these procedures. While indirect measurements of heating, such as estimating the specic absorption rate (SAR), can be used, direct observation of temperature provides the most vital information with regard to evaluating delivery in most cases. erefore, many therapies employ some combination of imaging, modeling, and thermometry to aid in planning and monitoring of thermal therapies.