Expanding thermal ablation to the 'intermediate-sized' renal mass: clinical utility in T1b tumors

Comparison of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy with Laparoscopic Cryoablation in the Treatment of Localised Renal Tumours: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes

Preserving renal function and controlling oncological outcomes are pertinent when managing renal neoplasms. Cryoablation is the recommended treatment only for clinical T1a stage renal tumour. Here, we compared the outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RaPN) and laparoscopic cryoablation (LCA) in the treatment of patients with localised T1-T2 renal tumours. Overall, 86 patients who received RaPN and 78 patients underwent LCA were included in this study. The intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes in the LCA group were non-inferior to the RaPN group. Moreover, LCA demonstrated shorter operative time (267.45 ± 104.53 min vs. 138.56 ± 45.28 min, p < 0.001), lower blood loss (300.56 ± 360.73 mL vs. 30.73 ± 50.31 mL, p < 0.001), and slight renal function deterioration because of the reduced invasiveness, without compromising on the oncological outcomes.

Current opinion in urology 2017: focal therapy of small renal lesions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the increasing incidence of small renal masses (SRMs), ablative technologies are becoming more commonly utilized. With any nascent treatment modality, outcomes literature needs to be constantly re-evaluated. The purpose of this review is to revisit the most updated literature regarding the safety and efficacy of ablative treatments of renal lesions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature demonstrates that small renal tumor ablation is safe and effective. Although it does not have the same oncological efficacy of surgical extirpation, local recurrence-free survival has consistently shown to be around 90%. Cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation have longer-term data demonstrating durable responses. Microwave ablation and irreversible electroporation are promising modalities with longer-term data coming. Complication rates and procedural morbidity of ablation are consistently lower than for partial nephrectomy.

SUMMARY

Image-guided focal ablation is a valuable tool in the management of SRMs. Although it does not have the same efficacy of surgical extirpation, with the ability to perform repeat procedures and salvage surgery if necessary, oncologic outcomes are comparable to those of upfront surgery. Ultimately, longer-term studies and prospective trials are needed to further elucidate these modalities.

Focal therapy versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in the management of clinical T1 renal masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RPN) and focal therapy (FT) have both been successfully employed in the management of small renal masses. However, despite this being the era of minimally invasive surgery, few comparative studies exist on RPN and FT. The aim of our study is to review perioperative, renal functional and oncologic outcomes of FT and RPN in cT1 renal masses.

METHODS

Literature published in Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases up to April 22, 2018, was systematically searched. We included literature comparing outcomes of FT (radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, microwave ablation, and irreversible electroporation) and RPN. Studies that reported only on laparoscopic partial nephrectomy or open partial nephrectomy, and review articles, editorials, letters, or cost analyses were excluded. In total, data from 1166 patients were included.

RESULTS

From 858 total articles, 7 nonrandomized, observational studies were included. Compared with RPN, FT was associated with a significantly lower decrease of estimated glomerular filtration rate (weighted mean difference [WMD] -8.06 mL/min/1.73 m; confidence interval [CI] -15.85 to -0.26; P = .04), and lower estimated blood loss (WMD -49.61 mL; CI -60.78 to -38.45; P < .001). However, patients who underwent FT had a significantly increased risk of local recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 9.89; CI 4.24-23.04; P < .001) and distant metastasis (RR 6.42; CI 1.70-24.33; P = .006). However, operative times, lengths of stay, and complication rates were revealed to be similar between FT and RPN.

CONCLUSION

RPN has a substantial advantage in preventing cancer recurrence. However, in the era of minimally invasive surgery, FT has advantages in renal function preservation and less bleeding. Long-term follow-up for survival rates and comparative analysis of microwave ablation and irreversible electroporation are needed to extend FT for patients with significant morbidities and for those who need sufficient renal function preservation with minimal bleeding.