Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Percutaneous Microwave Ablation versus Cryoablation for Small Renal Masses (≤4 cm): 12-Year Experience at a Single Center.
Sun, George; Eisenbrey, John R; Smolock, Amanda R; Lallas, Costas D; Anton, Kevin F; Adamo, Robert D; Shaw, Colette M.
Affiliation
  • Sun G; Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Eisenbrey JR; Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Smolock AR; Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
  • Lallas CD; Department of Urology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Anton KF; Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Adamo RD; Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Shaw CM; Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: cshaw@raadocs.com.
J Vasc Interv Radiol ; 35(6): 865-873, 2024 Jun.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38360294
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To determine whether microwave ablation (MWA) has equivalent outcomes to those of cryoablation (CA) in terms of technical success, adverse events, local tumor recurrence, and survival in adult patients with solid enhancing renal masses ≤4 cm. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

A retrospective review was performed of 279 small renal masses (≤4 cm) in 257 patients (median age, 71 years; range, 40-92 years) treated with either CA (n = 191) or MWA (n = 88) between January 2008 and December 2020 at a single high-volume institution. Evaluations of adverse events, treatment effectiveness, and therapeutic outcomes were conducted for both MWA and CA. Disease-free, metastatic-free, and cancer-specific survival rates were tabulated. The estimated glomerular filtration rate was employed to examine treatment-related alterations in renal function.

RESULTS:

No difference in patient age (P = .99) or sex (P = .06) was observed between the MWA and CA groups. Cryoablated lesions were larger (P < .01) and of greater complexity (P = .03). The technical success rate for MWA was 100%, whereas 1 of 191 cryoablated lesions required retreatment for residual tumor. There was no impact on renal function after CA (P = .76) or MWA (P = .49). Secondary analysis using propensity score matching demonstrated no significant differences in local recurrence rates (P = .39), adverse event rates (P = .20), cancer-free survival (P = .76), or overall survival (P = .19) when comparing matched cohorts of patients who underwent MWA and CA.

CONCLUSIONS:

High technical success and local disease control were achieved for both MWA and CA. Cancer-specific survival was equivalent. Higher adverse event rates after CA may reflect the tendency to treat larger, more complex lesions with CA.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Cryosurgery / Tumor Burden / Kidney Neoplasms / Microwaves / Neoplasm Recurrence, Local Limits: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol / J. vasc. interv. radiol / Journal of vascular and interventional radiology Journal subject: ANGIOLOGIA / RADIOLOGIA Year: 2024 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Cryosurgery / Tumor Burden / Kidney Neoplasms / Microwaves / Neoplasm Recurrence, Local Limits: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Language: En Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol / J. vasc. interv. radiol / Journal of vascular and interventional radiology Journal subject: ANGIOLOGIA / RADIOLOGIA Year: 2024 Type: Article