Johannes Uhlig1,2, Arne Strauss3, Gerta Rücker4, Ali Seif Amir Hosseini1, Joachim Lotz1,5, Lutz Trojan3, Hyun S Kim2, Annemarie Uhlig6. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany. 2. Division of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. 3. Department of Urology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. 4. Faculty of Medicine and Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. 5. German Centre for Cardiovascular Research, Partnersite Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany. 6. Department of Urology, University Medical Center Goettingen, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany. annemarie.uhlig@med.uni-goettingen.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare partial nephrectomy (PN), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryoablation (CRA) and microwave ablation (MWA) regarding oncologic, perioperative and functional outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE libraries were searched for studies comparing PN, RFA, CRA or MWA and reporting on any-cause or cancer-specific mortality, local recurrence, complications or renal function. Network meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies with 24,077 patients were included. Patients receiving RFA, CRA or MWA were older and had more comorbidities compared with PN. All-cause mortality was higher for CRA and RFA compared with PN (incidence rate ratio IRR = 2.58, IRR = 2.58, p < 0.001, respectively). No significant differences in cancer-specific mortality were evident. Local recurrence was higher for CRA, RFA and MWA compared with PN (IRR = 4.13, IRR = 1.79, IRR = 2.52, p < 0.05 respectively). A decline in renal function was less pronounced after RFA versus PN, CRA and MWA (mean difference in GFR MD = 6.49; MD = 5.82; MD = 10.89, p < 0.05 respectively). CONCLUSION: Higher overall survival and local control of PN compared with ablative therapies did not translate into significantly better cancer-specific mortality. Most studies carried a high risk of bias by selecting younger and healthier patients for PN, which may drive superior survival and local control. Physicians should be aware of the lack of high-quality evidence and the potential benefits of ablative techniques for certain patients, including a superior complication profile and renal function preservation. KEY POINTS: • Patients selected for ablation of small renal masses are older and have more comorbidities compared with those undergoing partial nephrectomy. • Partial nephrectomy yields lower all-cause mortality, which is probably biased by patient selection and does not translate into prolonged cancer-free survival. • The decline of renal function is smallest after radiofrequency ablation for small renal masses.
PURPOSE: To compare partial nephrectomy (PN), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cryoablation (CRA) and microwave ablation (MWA) regarding oncologic, perioperative and functional outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE libraries were searched for studies comparing PN, RFA, CRA or MWA and reporting on any-cause or cancer-specific mortality, local recurrence, complications or renal function. Network meta-analyses were performed. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies with 24,077 patients were included. Patients receiving RFA, CRA or MWA were older and had more comorbidities compared with PN. All-cause mortality was higher for CRA and RFA compared with PN (incidence rate ratio IRR = 2.58, IRR = 2.58, p < 0.001, respectively). No significant differences in cancer-specific mortality were evident. Local recurrence was higher for CRA, RFA and MWA compared with PN (IRR = 4.13, IRR = 1.79, IRR = 2.52, p < 0.05 respectively). A decline in renal function was less pronounced after RFA versus PN, CRA and MWA (mean difference in GFR MD = 6.49; MD = 5.82; MD = 10.89, p < 0.05 respectively). CONCLUSION: Higher overall survival and local control of PN compared with ablative therapies did not translate into significantly better cancer-specific mortality. Most studies carried a high risk of bias by selecting younger and healthier patients for PN, which may drive superior survival and local control. Physicians should be aware of the lack of high-quality evidence and the potential benefits of ablative techniques for certain patients, including a superior complication profile and renal function preservation. KEY POINTS: • Patients selected for ablation of small renal masses are older and have more comorbidities compared with those undergoing partial nephrectomy. • Partial nephrectomy yields lower all-cause mortality, which is probably biased by patient selection and does not translate into prolonged cancer-free survival. • The decline of renal function is smallest after radiofrequency ablation for small renal masses.
Authors: William C Huang; Andrew S Levey; Angel M Serio; Mark Snyder; Andrew J Vickers; Ganesh V Raj; Peter T Scardino; Paul Russo Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: J J Deeks; J Dinnes; R D'Amico; A J Sowden; C Sakarovitch; F Song; M Petticrew; D G Altman Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2003 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Nicholas J Hegarty; Inderbir S Gill; Mihir M Desai; Erick M Remer; Charles M O'Malley; Jihad H Kaouk Journal: Urology Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Rebecca L O'Malley; Aaron D Berger; Jamie A Kanofsky; Courtney K Phillips; Michael Stifelman; Samir S Taneja Journal: BJU Int Date: 2006-12-01 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Joshua M Stern; Robert Svatek; Sangtae Park; Michael Hermann; Yair Lotan; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Jeffrey A Cadeddu Journal: BJU Int Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Patrick O Richard; Philippe D Violette; Bimal Bhindi; Rodney H Breau; Wassim Kassouf; Luke T Lavallée; Michael Jewett; John R Kachura; Anil Kapoor; Maxine Noel-Lamy; Michael Ordon; Stephen E Pautler; Frédéric Pouliot; Alan I So; Ricardo A Rendon; Simon Tanguay; Christine Collins; Maryam Kandi; Bobby Shayegan; Andrew Weller; Antonio Finelli; Andrea Kokorovic; Jay Nayak Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2022-02 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: B M Aarts; W Prevoo; M A J Meier; A Bex; R G H Beets-Tan; E G Klompenhouwer; F M Gómez Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2020-02-12 Impact factor: 2.740