J J Wendler1,2, B Friebe3, D Baumunk4,5, A Blana4,6, T Franiel4,7, R Ganzer4,8, B Hadaschik4,9, T Henkel4,10, K U Köhrmann4,11, J Köllermann4,12, T Kuru4,13, S Machtens4,14, A Roosen4,15, G Salomon4,16, H P Schlemmer4,17, L Sentker4,18, U Witzsch4,19, U B Liehr4,5, J Ricke3, M Schostak4,5. 1. Arbeitskreis für fokale und Mikrotherapie der Akademie (AKFM), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie (DGU) e. V., Düsseldorf, Deutschland. Johann.wendler@med.ovgu.de. 2. Universitätsklinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Leipziger Straße 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Deutschland. Johann.wendler@med.ovgu.de. 3. Universitätsklinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Deutschland. 4. Arbeitskreis für fokale und Mikrotherapie der Akademie (AKFM), Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie (DGU) e. V., Düsseldorf, Deutschland. 5. Universitätsklinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Leipziger Straße 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Deutschland. 6. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Klinikum Fürth, Fürth, Deutschland. 7. Institut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Deutschland. 8. Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Deutschland. 9. Urologische Klinik und Poliklinik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 10. Urologische Praxis Dr. Henkel & Dr. Kahmann, Berlin, Deutschland. 11. Klinik für Urologie, Theresien-Krankenhaus Mannheim, Mannheim, Deutschland. 12. Institut für Pathologie, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach am Main, Deutschland. 13. Universitätsklinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln, Deutschland. 14. Klinik für Urologie, Marien-Krankenhaus gGmbH, Bergisch-Gladbach, Deutschland. 15. Klinik für Urologie, Augusta-Krankenanstalt gGmbH Bochum, Bochum, Deutschland. 16. Martini-Klinik, UKE GmbH, Hamburg, Deutschland. 17. Abteilung für Radiologie, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 18. Urologische Gemeinschaftspraxis, Sinsheim, Deutschland. 19. Klinik für Urologie und Kinderurologie, Krankenhaus Nordwest, Frankfurt/Main, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The rising incidence of renal cell carcinoma, its more frequent early detection (stage T1a) and the increasing prevalence of chronic renal failure with higher morbidity and shorter life expectancy underscore the need for multimodal focal nephron-sparing therapy. DISCUSSION: During the past decade, the gold standard shifted from radical to partial nephrectomy. Depending on the surgeon's experience, the patient's constitution and the tumor's location, the intervention can be performed laparoscopically with the corresponding advantages of lower invasiveness. A treatment alternative can be advantageous for selected patients with high morbidity and/or an increased risk of complications associated with anesthesia or surgery. Corresponding risk stratification necessitates previous confirmation of the small renal mass (cT1a) by histological examination of biopsy samples. Active surveillance represents a controlled delay in the initiation of treatment. RESULTS: Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and laparoscopic cryoablation are currently the most common treatment alternatives, although there are limitations particularly for renal tumors located centrally near the hilum. More recent ablation procedures such as high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), irreversible electroporation, microwave ablation, percutaneous stereotactic ablative radiotherapy and high-dose brachytherapy have high potential in some cases but are currently regarded as experimental for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.
BACKGROUND: The rising incidence of renal cell carcinoma, its more frequent early detection (stage T1a) and the increasing prevalence of chronic renal failure with higher morbidity and shorter life expectancy underscore the need for multimodal focal nephron-sparing therapy. DISCUSSION: During the past decade, the gold standard shifted from radical to partial nephrectomy. Depending on the surgeon's experience, the patient's constitution and the tumor's location, the intervention can be performed laparoscopically with the corresponding advantages of lower invasiveness. A treatment alternative can be advantageous for selected patients with high morbidity and/or an increased risk of complications associated with anesthesia or surgery. Corresponding risk stratification necessitates previous confirmation of the small renal mass (cT1a) by histological examination of biopsy samples. Active surveillance represents a controlled delay in the initiation of treatment. RESULTS: Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and laparoscopic cryoablation are currently the most common treatment alternatives, although there are limitations particularly for renal tumors located centrally near the hilum. More recent ablation procedures such as high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), irreversible electroporation, microwave ablation, percutaneous stereotactic ablative radiotherapy and high-dose brachytherapy have high potential in some cases but are currently regarded as experimental for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma.
Authors: Anna J Moreland; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; Sara L Best; J Louis Hinshaw; Meghan G Lubner; Marci L Alexander; Christopher L Brace; Douglas R Kitchin; Sean P Hedican; Stephen Y Nakada; Fred T Lee; E Jason Abel Journal: J Endourol Date: 2014-07-02 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Timothy W I Clark; Bruce Malkowicz; S William Stavropoulos; Richard Sanchez; Michael C Soulen; Maxim Itkin; Aalpen Patel; Jeffrey I Mondschein; A J Wein Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 3.464
Authors: Brian R Lane; Robert Abouassaly; Tianming Gao; Christopher J Weight; Adrian V Hernandez; Benjamin T Larson; Jihad H Kaouk; Inderbir S Gill; Steven C Campbell Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Inderbir S Gill; Surena F Matin; Mihir M Desai; Jihad H Kaouk; Andrew Steinberg; Ed Mascha; Julie Thornton; Mahmoud H Sherief; Brenda Strzempkowski; Andrew C Novick Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 7.450