Advertisement

Percutaneous Microwave Ablation is Comparable to Cryoablation for the Treatment of T1a Renal Masses: Results From a Cross-Sectional Study

      Abstract

      Introduction

      Percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) of renal masses (RM) is still considered experimental as opposed to established procedures such as cryoablation (CA). We aimed to compare perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes of patients with RM treated with CA and MWA.

      Materials and Methods

      Data from 116 (69.9%) and 50 (30.1%) patients treated with CA and MWA for RM were analyzed. Patients’ demographics and perioperative data were collected including nephrometry scores, complications, pre- and postprocedural renal function. Tumor persistence and recurrence were recorded. Descriptive statistics compared functional outcomes between groups. Cox regression analyses tested risk factors associated with recurrence.

      Results

      Groups were similar in terms of RM diameter, nephrometry scores and histology distribution. Median follow-up was 26 (13-46) and 24 (14-36) months for CA and MWA, respectively. The rate of overall (36.2% for CA vs. 24% for MWA, P= .1) and major (Clavien ≥ 3a) complications (1.7% vs. 5.4%, P = .1) were similar among groups. The median decline of renal function after 6 months follow-up did not differ between CA and MWA (P = .8). Tumor persistence [4.3% vs. 12%] and recurrence [9.5% and 7.1%] rates were similar for CA and MWA. Three years recurrence free and overall survival were 91% versus 95% (log-rank P = .77) and 80 versus 88% (log-rank P = .23) in the CA and MWA groups, respectively. At Cox analysis no predictors were found associated with recurrence.

      Conclusion

      Despite being considered still experimental, MWA showed comparable outcomes relative to CA in terms of safety, preservation of renal function and oncological efficacy.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Genitourinary Cancer
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Capitanio U
        • Bensalah K
        • Bex A
        • et al.
        Epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma.
        Eur Urol. 2019; 75: 74-84https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.036
        • Haifler M
        • Neheman A
        • Zisman A.
        Has stage migration in renal cancer run its course? A SEER database analysis.
        Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2020; 18 (Published online March 19): e368-e373
        • Umari P
        • Rizzo M
        • Billia M
        • et al.
        Oncological outcomes of active surveillance and percutaneous cryoablation of small renal masses are similar at intermediate term follow-up.
        Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2022; 74: 321-328
        • Morris CS
        • Baerlocher MO
        • Dariushnia SR
        • et al.
        Society of Interventional Radiology Position Statement on the role of percutaneous ablation in renal cell carcinoma.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020; 31 (e3): 189-194https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2019.11.001
        • Krokidis ME
        • Orsi F
        • Katsanos K
        • Helmberger T
        • Adam A.
        CIRSE guidelines on percutaneous ablation of small renal cell carcinoma.
        Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017; 40: 177-191https://doi.org/10.1007/S00270-016-1531-Y/TABLES/4
        • Brace CL.
        Radiofrequency and microwave ablation of the liver, lung, kidney, and bone: what are the differences?.
        Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2009; 38: 135-143https://doi.org/10.1067/J.CPRADIOL.2007.10.001
        • Ljungberg B.
        • Albiges L.
        • Abu-Ghanem Y.
        • et al.
        European association of urology guidelines on renal cell carcinoma: The 2022 update.
        Eur Urol. 2022;
        • Cadeddu JA
        • Chang A
        • Clark PE
        • et al.
        American Urological Association (AUA) Renal Mass and Localized Renal Cancer: AUA Guideline.
        American Urological Association, 2017: 1-49
        • D'Hoore W
        • Sicotte C
        • Tilquin C.
        Risk adjustment in outcome assessment: the Charlson comorbidity index.
        Methods Inf Med. 1993; 32: 382-387
        • Bhagavatula SK
        • Shyn PB.
        Image-guided renal interventions.
        Urol Clin North Am. 2018; 45: 351-363https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UCL.2018.03.014
        • Atwell TD
        • Carter RE
        • Schmit GD
        • et al.
        Complications following 573 percutaneous renal radiofrequency and cryoablation procedures.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012; 23: 48-54https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2011.09.008
        • Lubner MG
        • Brace CL
        • Hinshaw JL
        • Lee FT.
        Microwave tumor ablation: mechanism of action, clinical results, and devices.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010; 21: S192-S203https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2010.04.007
        • Zhou W
        • Uppot RN
        • Feldman AS
        • Arellano RS.
        Percutaneous image-guided thermal ablation for multifocal renal cell carcinoma: 10-year experience at a single center.
        Am J Roentgenol. 2017; 209: 733-739https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.17.18290
        • Wehrenberg-Klee E
        • Clark TWI
        • Malkowicz SB
        • et al.
        Impact on renal function of percutaneous thermal ablation of renal masses in patients with preexisting chronic kidney disease.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012; 23: 41-45https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2011.09.002
        • Wilcox Vanden Berg RN
        • Calderon LP
        • LaRussa S
        • et al.
        Microwave ablation of cT1a renal cell carcinoma: oncologic and functional outcomes at a single center.
        Clin Imaging. 2021; 76: 199-204https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLINIMAG.2021.04.016
        • Filippiadis D
        • Mauri G
        • Marra P
        • Charalampopoulos G
        • Gennaro N
        • De Cobelli F
        Percutaneous ablation techniques for renal cell carcinoma: current status and future trends.
        Int J Hyperth. 2019; 36: 21-30https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2019.1647352
        • Zhou W
        • Herwald SE
        • McCarthy C
        • Uppot RN
        • Arellano RS.
        Radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, and microwave ablation for T1a renal cell carcinoma: a comparative evaluation of therapeutic and renal function outcomes.
        J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2019; 30: 1035-1042https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2018.12.013
        • De Cobelli F
        • Papa M
        • Panzeri M
        • et al.
        Percutaneous microwave ablation versus cryoablation in the treatment of T1a renal tumors.
        Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020; 43: 76-83https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-019-02313-7
        • Aarts BM
        • Prevoo W
        • Meier MAJ
        • et al.
        Percutaneous microwave ablation of histologically proven T1 renal cell carcinoma.
        Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020; 43: 1025-1033https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-020-02423-7
        • Lum MA
        • Shah SB
        • Durack JC
        • Nikolovski I.
        Imaging of small renal masses before and after thermal ablation.
        Radiographics. 2019; 39: 2134-2145https://doi.org/10.1148/RG.2019190083
        • Rizzo M
        • Cabas P
        • Pavan N
        • et al.
        Needle tract seeding after percutaneous cryoablation of small renal masses; a case series and literature review.
        Scand J Urol. 2020; 54: 122-127https://doi.org/10.1080/21681805.2020.1736149