Courtney Yong1, Sarah L Mott2, Sandeep Laroia3, Chad R Tracy1,3. 1. Department of Urology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. 2. Biostatistics Core, Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the safety of microwave ablation (MWA) as an emerging technology for treating small renal masses. Materials and Methods: Patients with renal masses treated at a high-volume center with MWA between March 2015 and June 2019 were retrospectively identified. Safety, changes in renal function, primary treatment efficacy, and the natural history of imaging characteristics of masses postablation were examined. Results: Forty-five patients underwent MWA during the study period. Median age was 71 years (range 31-87). Median RENAL nephrometry score was 6 (range 4-9) with mean tumor size 2.6 ± 0.7 cm. Thirty-three percent of tumors were within 4 mm of the collecting system. Median total microwave energy applied was 400 W (range 105-2600 W). There was no significant change in creatinine (p = 0.21) or glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (p = 0.09) from preoperative to postoperative day 1 (POD#1) levels. There was a statistically but not clinically significant decrease in hemoglobin from preoperative to POD#1 levels (estimated -0.06 from 7 days before procedure to POD#1, p = 0.02). There was no durable change in creatinine (p = 0.16) or GFR (p = 0.72) at median follow-up of 7.5 months. There were 4 (9%) complications: three Clavien grade 1 and one Clavien grade 3 that led to loss of the kidney. Tumor size decreased postoperatively by an estimated -0.03 cm/month (range 0-1.9 cm, p < 0.01). Initial technical success was 100%. Primary treatment efficacy was 94%. Conclusion: MWA shows promise as an alternative thermal ablative technique with excellent short-term outcomes.
Purpose: To investigate the safety of microwave ablation (MWA) as an emerging technology for treating small renal masses. Materials and Methods:Patients with renal masses treated at a high-volume center with MWA between March 2015 and June 2019 were retrospectively identified. Safety, changes in renal function, primary treatment efficacy, and the natural history of imaging characteristics of masses postablation were examined. Results: Forty-five patients underwent MWA during the study period. Median age was 71 years (range 31-87). Median RENAL nephrometry score was 6 (range 4-9) with mean tumor size 2.6 ± 0.7 cm. Thirty-three percent of tumors were within 4 mm of the collecting system. Median total microwave energy applied was 400 W (range 105-2600 W). There was no significant change in creatinine (p = 0.21) or glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (p = 0.09) from preoperative to postoperative day 1 (POD#1) levels. There was a statistically but not clinically significant decrease in hemoglobin from preoperative to POD#1 levels (estimated -0.06 from 7 days before procedure to POD#1, p = 0.02). There was no durable change in creatinine (p = 0.16) or GFR (p = 0.72) at median follow-up of 7.5 months. There were 4 (9%) complications: three Clavien grade 1 and one Clavien grade 3 that led to loss of the kidney. Tumor size decreased postoperatively by an estimated -0.03 cm/month (range 0-1.9 cm, p < 0.01). Initial technical success was 100%. Primary treatment efficacy was 94%. Conclusion: MWA shows promise as an alternative thermal ablative technique with excellent short-term outcomes.
Authors: Marki E Klapperich; E Jason Abel; Timothy J Ziemlewicz; Sara Best; Meghan G Lubner; Stephen Y Nakada; J Louis Hinshaw; Christopher L Brace; Fred T Lee; Shane A Wells Journal: Radiology Date: 2017-01-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Chad Robert Tracy; Paul Kogan; Amit Gupta; Jeffrey C Gahan; Nithin P J Theckumparampil; Sammy E Elsamra; Zhamshid Okunov; Shiliang Sun; Chandana Lall; Igor Lobko; Jaime Landman; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Louis R Kavoussi Journal: J Endourol Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Jeffrey C Gahan; Michael D Richter; Casey A Seideman; Clayton Trimmer; Danny Chan; Matthew Weaver; Ephrem O Olweny; Jeffrey A Cadeddu Journal: Urology Date: 2014-10-18 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Matthew S Davenport; Elaine M Caoili; Richard H Cohan; James H Ellis; Ellen J Higgins; Jonathon Willatt; Giovanna A Fox Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Edward D Matsumoto; Lori Watumull; D Brooke Johnson; Kenneth Ogan; Grant D Taylor; Shellie Josephs; Jeffrey A Cadeddu Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Luke P O'Connor; Shayann Ramedani; Michael Daneshvar; Arvin K George; Andre Luis Abreu; Giovanni E Cacciamani; Amir H Lebastchi Journal: Asian J Urol Date: 2021-05-03