4.4 Article

CT-guided percutaneous cryoterapy of renal masses

Journal

JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages 383-392

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2006.12.007

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA-22453] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To assess the results of initial and current techniques for percutaneous renal cryotherapy, including long-term imaging outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous cryotherapy was performed on 49 masses in 48 outpatients and procedure comfort noted for each. These 49 masses included 36 primary renal cell carcinomas (RCCs), 3 oncocytomas, 1 angiomyolipoma, 6 renal inflammatory lesions, 2 benign parenchymal changes, and 1 colon cancer metastasis. All complications were graded according to standardized criteria. RESULTS: Patients received only local anesthesia and moderate sedation during the procedure and were discharged with minimal discomfort within 4-6 hours. All cryotherapy zones were well defined by CT during ablation as hypodense ice with an average diameter of 5.3 cm, covering an average tumor size of 3.3 cm. Average ablation zone diameters showed significant reduction over time (P <.001), becoming significantly less than the original tumor size by 12 months (P <.05). Major and minor complications were seen in 3 (6%) and 11 (22%) procedures, respectively. At a mean follow-up of 1.6 years (range, 1 week to 3.8 years) for primary RCC patients, four failures (11.1%) by imaging criteria were noted, but one proved to be inflammatory tissue at rebiopsy (estimated neoplastic failure rate = 3/36 8.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous renal cryotherapy is a well-tolerated outpatient procedure that allows safe, CT monitoring of ice formation beyond visible tumor margins. With appropriate cryoprobe placements, a low failure rate appears less dependent on tumor size or location. Ablation volume involution was > 80% after 6 months.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available