Jie Yu1, Hui Wang2, Zhi-Gang Cheng1, Fang-Yi Liu1, Qin-Ying Li3, Guang-Zhi He4, Yan-Chun Luo1, Xiao-Ling Yu1, Zhi-Yu Han1, Ping Liang5. 1. Department of Interventional Ultrasound, PLA Medical College & Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China. 2. Department of Ultrasound, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, 130000, China. 3. Department of Ultrasound, Puyang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine of Henan Province, No. 135 Shengli East Road, Puyang, 457000, Henan Province, China. 4. Department of Ultrasound, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences Shenzhen Hospital, 4253 Songbai Road, Matian Street, Guangming District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China. 5. Department of Interventional Ultrasound, PLA Medical College & Chinese PLA General Hospital, 28 Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China. liangping301@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We updated the experience on percutaneous microwave ablation for renal cell carcinoma with five-center data and long-term follow-up. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed the T1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma patients who underwent microwave ablation between April 2006 and December 2019. Clinicopathological and procedural data were collected. Technical effectiveness and complications were assessed, and the Kaplan-Meier method was used for cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, and local neoplastic process analyses. RESULTS: A total of 323 consecutive patients (mean age, 62.9 years ± 14.0) with 371 biopsy-proved tumors (mean diameter, 2.9 cm ± 1.2) were enrolled, and 42.6% of the tumors were located adjacent to collecting system/bowel and technical effectiveness was achieved in 360 (97.0%) tumors. For 275 cT1a patients, during median follow-up time of 66.0 months (IQR, 58.4-73.6), 10-year local neoplastic processes, cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 1.9%, 87.4%, 71.8, and 67.5%, respectively. For 48 cT1b patients, during the median follow-up time of 30.4 months (IQR, 17.7-44.8), 5-year local tumor progression, cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 11.3%, 91.4%, 69.1, and 89.2%, respectively. Major complications showed no differences between cT1a (3.5%) and cT1b (6.9%) patients (p = 0.28). A clinical risk stratification system was developed based on multivariable model to predict DFS and CSS with c-indexes of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71-0.85) and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65-0.90), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With matured follow-up at five institutions, ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation is a reliable treatment option for cT1a renal cell carcinoma even in dangerous location and appears to be promising for cT1b tumors. KEY POINTS: • To our knowledge, this is the first multicenter cohort of long-term oncologic outcomes with percutaneous MWA of cT1 RCC. • The predicting model we developed is accurate to predict the long-term DFS and CSS, which can help to provide a better MWA prognostication over routinely available clinical information. • The available evidence shows that microwave ablation of clinical stage T1 RCC is safe and reliable with promising long-term oncologic outcomes, especially for cT1a RCC with excellent 10-year results.
OBJECTIVES: We updated the experience on percutaneous microwave ablation for renal cell carcinoma with five-center data and long-term follow-up. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed the T1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma patients who underwent microwave ablation between April 2006 and December 2019. Clinicopathological and procedural data were collected. Technical effectiveness and complications were assessed, and the Kaplan-Meier method was used for cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, and local neoplastic process analyses. RESULTS: A total of 323 consecutive patients (mean age, 62.9 years ± 14.0) with 371 biopsy-proved tumors (mean diameter, 2.9 cm ± 1.2) were enrolled, and 42.6% of the tumors were located adjacent to collecting system/bowel and technical effectiveness was achieved in 360 (97.0%) tumors. For 275 cT1a patients, during median follow-up time of 66.0 months (IQR, 58.4-73.6), 10-year local neoplastic processes, cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 1.9%, 87.4%, 71.8, and 67.5%, respectively. For 48 cT1b patients, during the median follow-up time of 30.4 months (IQR, 17.7-44.8), 5-year local tumor progression, cancer-specific survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 11.3%, 91.4%, 69.1, and 89.2%, respectively. Major complications showed no differences between cT1a (3.5%) and cT1b (6.9%) patients (p = 0.28). A clinical risk stratification system was developed based on multivariable model to predict DFS and CSS with c-indexes of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71-0.85) and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.65-0.90), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With matured follow-up at five institutions, ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation is a reliable treatment option for cT1a renal cell carcinoma even in dangerous location and appears to be promising for cT1b tumors. KEY POINTS: • To our knowledge, this is the first multicenter cohort of long-term oncologic outcomes with percutaneous MWA of cT1 RCC. • The predicting model we developed is accurate to predict the long-term DFS and CSS, which can help to provide a better MWA prognostication over routinely available clinical information. • The available evidence shows that microwave ablation of clinical stage T1 RCC is safe and reliable with promising long-term oncologic outcomes, especially for cT1a RCC with excellent 10-year results.
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Eric Jonasch; Neeraj Agarwal; Sam Bhayani; William P Bro; Sam S Chang; Toni K Choueiri; Brian A Costello; Ithaar H Derweesh; Mayer Fishman; Thomas H Gallagher; John L Gore; Steven L Hancock; Michael R Harrison; Won Kim; Christos Kyriakopoulos; Chad LaGrange; Elaine T Lam; Clayton Lau; M Dror Michaelson; Thomas Olencki; Phillip M Pierorazio; Elizabeth R Plimack; Bruce G Redman; Brian Shuch; Brad Somer; Guru Sonpavde; Jeffrey Sosman; Mary Dwyer; Rashmi Kumar Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 11.908
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: Steven Campbell; Robert G Uzzo; Mohamad E Allaf; Eric B Bass; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Anthony Chang; Peter E Clark; Brian J Davis; Ithaar H Derweesh; Leo Giambarresi; Debra A Gervais; Susie L Hu; Brian R Lane; Bradley C Leibovich; Philip M Pierorazio Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Borje Ljungberg; Karim Bensalah; Steven Canfield; Saeed Dabestani; Fabian Hofmann; Milan Hora; Markus A Kuczyk; Thomas Lam; Lorenzo Marconi; Axel S Merseburger; Peter Mulders; Thomas Powles; Michael Staehler; Alessandro Volpe; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Jack R Andrews; Thomas Atwell; Grant Schmit; Christine M Lohse; A Nicholas Kurup; Adam Weisbrod; Matthew R Callstrom; John C Cheville; Stephen A Boorjian; Bradley C Leibovich; R Houston Thompson Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2019-05-03 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Zev Leopold; Rachel Passarelli; Mark Mikhail; Alexandra Tabakin; Kevin Chua; Ronald D Ennis; John Nosher; Eric A Singer Journal: J Kidney Cancer VHL Date: 2022-08-15