Literature DB >> 25615756

Radiation exposure from CT-guided ablation of renal masses: effects on life expectancy.

Jonathan D Eisenberg1, Debra A Gervais, Sarabjeet Singh, Mannudeep K Kalra, Sharjeel H Sabir, Aaron B Paul, Pari V Pandharipande.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to project the effects of radiation exposure on life expectancy (LE) in patients who opt for CT-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) instead of surgery for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS. We developed a decision-analytic Markov model to compare LE losses attributable to radiation exposure in hypothetical 65-year-old patients who undergo CT-guided RFA versus surgery for small (≤ 4 cm) RCC. We incorporated mortality risks from RCC, radiation-induced cancers (for procedural and follow-up CT scans), and all other causes; institutional data informed the RFA procedural effective dose. Radiation-induced cancer risks were generated using an organ-specific approach. Effects of varying model parameters and of dose-reduction strategies were evaluated in sensitivity analysis. RESULTS. Cumulative RFA exposures (up to 305.2 mSv for one session plus surveillance) exceeded those from surgery (up to 87.2 mSv). In 65-year-old men, excess LE loss from radiation-induced cancers, comparing RFA to surgery, was 11.7 days (14.6 days for RFA vs 2.9 days for surgery). Results varied with sex and age; this difference increased to 14.6 days in 65-year-old women and to 21.5 days in 55-year-old men. Dose-reduction strategies that addressed follow-up rather than procedural exposure had a greater impact. In 65-year-old men, this difference decreased to 3.8 days if post-RFA follow-up scans were restricted to a single phase; even elimination of RFA procedural exposure could not achieve equivalent benefits. CONCLUSION. CT-guided RFA remains a safe alternative to surgery, but with decreasing age, the higher burden of radiation exposure merits explicit consideration. Dose-reduction strategies that target follow-up rather than procedural exposure will have a greater impact.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT; decision analysis; radiation risk; radiofrequency ablation; renal cancer

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25615756     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.14.13010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  4 in total

1.  Radiation dose reduction in CT-guided cryoablation of renal tumors.

Authors:  Jim Zhong; Michael Gallagher; Chris Hounslow; Gareth Iball; Tze Wah
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 2.630

2.  CT-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation of T1a Renal Cell Carcinoma in Korea: Mid-Term Outcomes.

Authors:  Hae Jin Kim; Byung Kwan Park; Jung Jae Park; Chan Kyo Kim
Journal:  Korean J Radiol       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 3.  Follow-up after focal therapy in renal masses: an international multidisciplinary Delphi consensus project.

Authors:  P J Zondervan; P G K Wagstaff; M M Desai; D M de Bruin; A F Fraga; B A Hadaschik; J Köllermann; U B Liehr; S A Pahernik; H P Schlemmer; J J Wendler; F Algaba; J J M C H de la Rosette; M P Laguna Pes
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Long-Term Follow-Up Outcomes after Percutaneous US/CT-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation for cT1a-b Renal Masses: Experience from Single High-Volume Referral Center.

Authors:  Giovanni Mauri; Francesco Alessandro Mistretta; Guido Bonomo; Nicola Camisassi; Andrea Conti; Paolo Della Vigna; Matteo Ferro; Stefano Luzzago; Daniele Maiettini; Gennaro Musi; Nicolò Piacentini; Gianluca Maria Varano; Ottavio de Cobelli And Franco Orsi
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 6.639

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.