G Igor Pinkhasov1, Jay D Raman. 1. Division of Urology, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, 500 University Drive, c4830B, Hershey, PA 17033, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The increasing diagnosis of incidental small renal masses has contributed to energy ablative techniques being increasingly utilized as a primary surgical modality. Despite promise associated with thermal ablation, complications related to both cryoablation (CA) and radiofrequency ablations (RFA) do occur. METHODS: Contemporary literature on renal ablative procedures (CA and RFA) was reviewed to highlight diagnosis, management, and prevention of complications associated with these procedures. RESULTS: While morbidity for renal thermal ablation is typically less than extirpative renal surgery, a range of complications of varying severity may exist. Such complications can include sequelae from choice of access site, procedural bleeding, visceral injury, or damage to the collecting system or ipsilateral ureter. CONCLUSIONS: An understanding of complications secondary to renal ablation is essential for urologists and radiologists to facilitate prompt diagnosis, appropriate management, and future prevention.
INTRODUCTION: The increasing diagnosis of incidental small renal masses has contributed to energy ablative techniques being increasingly utilized as a primary surgical modality. Despite promise associated with thermal ablation, complications related to both cryoablation (CA) and radiofrequency ablations (RFA) do occur. METHODS: Contemporary literature on renal ablative procedures (CA and RFA) was reviewed to highlight diagnosis, management, and prevention of complications associated with these procedures. RESULTS: While morbidity for renal thermal ablation is typically less than extirpative renal surgery, a range of complications of varying severity may exist. Such complications can include sequelae from choice of access site, procedural bleeding, visceral injury, or damage to the collecting system or ipsilateral ureter. CONCLUSIONS: An understanding of complications secondary to renal ablation is essential for urologists and radiologists to facilitate prompt diagnosis, appropriate management, and future prevention.
Authors: Paul F Laeseke; Lisa A Sampson; Chris L Brace; Thomas C Winter; Jason P Fine; Fred T Lee Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: John M Hollingsworth; David C Miller; Stephanie Daignault; Brent K Hollenbeck Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Mohamad E Allaf; Ioannis M Varkarakis; Sam B Bhayani; Takeshi Inagaki; Louis R Kavoussi; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-08-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Adam Froemming; Thomas Atwell; Michael Farrell; Matthew Callstrom; Bradley Leibovich; William Charboneau Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: D Brooke Johnson; Stephen B Solomon; Li-Ming Su; Edward D Matsumoto; Louis R Kavoussi; Stephen Y Nakada; Timothy D Moon; W Bruce Shingleton; Jeffrey A Cadeddu Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: John B Malcolm; Tristan T Berry; Michael B Williams; Joshua E Logan; Robert W Given; Raymond S Lance; Bethany Barone; Sarah Shaves; Harlan Vingan; Michael D Fabrizio Journal: J Endourol Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Thomas Wimmer; Govindarajan Srimathveeravalli; Narendra Gutta; Paula C Ezell; Sebastien Monette; Majid Maybody; Joseph P Erinjery; Jeremy C Durack; Jonathan A Coleman; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2014-05-17 Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: Tatiana D Khokhlova; George R Schade; Yak-Nam Wang; Sergey V Buravkov; Valeriy P Chernikov; Julianna C Simon; Frank Starr; Adam D Maxwell; Michael R Bailey; Wayne Kreider; Vera A Khokhlova Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-12-27 Impact factor: 4.379