We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Laparoscopic renal cryoablation in 32 patients.
Urology 2000 November 2
OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic renal cryoablation is a developmental minimally invasive nephron-sparing treatment alternative for highly select patients with small renal tumors. We present our evolving experience with this procedure.
METHODS: Thirty-two patients (34 tumors) with a mean tumor size of 2.3 cm on preoperative computed tomography underwent laparoscopic renal cryoablation. As dictated by the tumor location, cryoablation was performed by either the retroperitoneal (n = 22) or the transperitoneal (n = 10) laparoscopic approach using real-time ultrasound monitoring. A double freeze-thaw cycle was routinely performed.
RESULTS: The mean surgical time was 2.9 hours, cryoablation time 15.1 minutes, and blood loss 66.8 mL. For a mean intraoperative ultrasonographic tumor size of 2 cm, the mean cryolesion size was 3.2 cm. The hospital stay was less than 23 hours in 22 (69%) of 32 patients. Sequential magnetic resonance imaging scans demonstrated a gradual contraction in the mean diameter of the cryolesions. Of the 20 patients who underwent a 1-year follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scan, the cryoablated tumor was no longer visible in 5. Of note, 23 patients have now undergone a 3 to 6-month follow-up computed tomography-directed biopsy of the cryoablated tumor site; the biopsy was negative for cancer in all 23 patients. No evidence of local or port-site recurrence was found during a mean follow-up of 16.2 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Critical long-term data regarding laparoscopic renal cryoablation, a developmental technique, are awaited. However, our initial experience is cautiously optimistic. Despite its significant potential for false-negative results, it is encouraging that the follow-up computed tomography-directed needle biopsies at 3 to 6 months were negative for cancer in 23 of 23 patients.
METHODS: Thirty-two patients (34 tumors) with a mean tumor size of 2.3 cm on preoperative computed tomography underwent laparoscopic renal cryoablation. As dictated by the tumor location, cryoablation was performed by either the retroperitoneal (n = 22) or the transperitoneal (n = 10) laparoscopic approach using real-time ultrasound monitoring. A double freeze-thaw cycle was routinely performed.
RESULTS: The mean surgical time was 2.9 hours, cryoablation time 15.1 minutes, and blood loss 66.8 mL. For a mean intraoperative ultrasonographic tumor size of 2 cm, the mean cryolesion size was 3.2 cm. The hospital stay was less than 23 hours in 22 (69%) of 32 patients. Sequential magnetic resonance imaging scans demonstrated a gradual contraction in the mean diameter of the cryolesions. Of the 20 patients who underwent a 1-year follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scan, the cryoablated tumor was no longer visible in 5. Of note, 23 patients have now undergone a 3 to 6-month follow-up computed tomography-directed biopsy of the cryoablated tumor site; the biopsy was negative for cancer in all 23 patients. No evidence of local or port-site recurrence was found during a mean follow-up of 16.2 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Critical long-term data regarding laparoscopic renal cryoablation, a developmental technique, are awaited. However, our initial experience is cautiously optimistic. Despite its significant potential for false-negative results, it is encouraging that the follow-up computed tomography-directed needle biopsies at 3 to 6 months were negative for cancer in 23 of 23 patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app