Radiofrequency Ablation, Cryoablation, and Microwave Ablation for the Treatment of Small Renal Masses: Efficacy and Complications

16Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Over the last two decades the detection rate of small renal masses has increased, due to improving diagnostic accuracy, and nephron-sparing treatments have become the first-choice curative option for small renal masses. As a minimally invasive alternative, thermal ablation has increased in popularity, offering a good clinical outcome and low recurrence rate. Radiofrequency ablation, Cryoablation, and Microwave ablation are the main ablative techniques. All of them are mostly overlapping in term of cancer specific free survival and outcomes. These techniques require imaging study to assess lesions features and to plan the procedure: US, CT, and both of them together are the leading guidance alternatives. Imaging findings guide the interventional radiologist in assessing the risk of complication and possible residual disease after procedure. The purpose of this review is to compare different ablative modalities and different imaging guides, underlining the effectiveness, outcomes, and complications related to each of them, in order to assist the interventional radiologist in choosing the best option for the patient.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bertolotti, L., Bazzocchi, M. V., Iemma, E., Pagnini, F., Ziglioli, F., Maestroni, U., … De Filippo, M. (2023, February 1). Radiofrequency Ablation, Cryoablation, and Microwave Ablation for the Treatment of Small Renal Masses: Efficacy and Complications. Diagnostics. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13030388

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free