Bipolar versus multipolar radiofrequency (RF) ablation for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma: differences in technical and clinical parameters

Asian Conference on Tumor Ablation Guidelines for Adrenal Tumor Ablation

Thermal ablation is a good alternative treatment in patients who are unable to undergo adrenalectomy. Even though the Asian Conference on Tumor Ablation (ACTA) has been held for many years, adrenal ablation guidelines have not been established. No guidelines for adrenal ablation are established in American and European countries, either. The aim of this review was to introduce the first version of ACTA guidelines for adrenal tumor ablation.

Asian Conference on Tumor Ablation guidelines for renal cell carcinoma

Thermal ablation has been established as an alternative treatment for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in patients who are poor candidates for surgery. However, while American and European guidelines have been established for American and European patients, respectively, no ablation guidelines for Asian patients with RCCs have been established many years after the Asian Conference on Tumor Ablation (ACTA) had been held. Given that Western guidelines are difficult to apply to Asian patients due to differences in body habitus, economic status, and insurance systems, the current review sought to establish the first version of the ACTA guidelines for treating a RCC with thermal ablation.

Percutaneous Image-guided Thermal Ablation for Renal Cell Carcinoma

Nephrectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, some patients are not suitable candidates for nephrectomy because of high surgical risk, reduced renal function, or the presence of multiple renal tumors. Percutaneous image-guided thermal ablation, including cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation, is a minimally invasive and highly effective treatment and can be used to treat RCC in patients who are not good candidates for surgery. This article will review percutaneous image-guided thermal ablation for RCC, covering treatment indications, ablation modalities and techniques, oncologic outcomes, and possible complications. In addition, the characteristics of each ablation modality and its comparison with nephrectomy are also presented.

Laparoscopic Radiofrequency Ablation versus Partial Nephrectomy for cT1a Renal Tumors: Long-Term Outcome of 179 Patients

OBJECTIVES

To compare the long-term functional and oncological results between laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) in selected clinical T1a (cT1a) renal tumor patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients with cT1a renal tumors who had LRFA or LPN at our institution between February 2006 and February 2015. Student's t test was used to compare the perioperative data between the two groups. Survival analyses were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 179 patients were included in the study. Patients in the LRFA cohort were significantly older and had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists sore than in the LPN cohort. The LRFA group had a significantly lower mean blood loss than the LPN group (p = 0.03). The percent decrease of GFR in the LRFA group was significantly lower than in the LPN group (p = 0.021). The 5-year overall, cancer-specific and disease-free survival were 93.3 vs. 94.6%, 98.0 vs. 98.5% and 97.1 vs. 97.3%, for LRFA and LPN, respectively (all p value >0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The excellent perioperative results, long-term functional and oncological outcomes of LRFA confirm that this technique is safe, nephron sparing and oncologically effective for the treatment of cT1a renal tumors.

Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria--a 10-year update

Image-guided tumor ablation has become a well-established hallmark of local cancer therapy. The breadth of options available in this growing field increases the need for standardization of terminology and reporting criteria to facilitate effective communication of ideas and appropriate comparison among treatments that use different technologies, such as chemical (eg, ethanol or acetic acid) ablation, thermal therapies (eg, radiofrequency, laser, microwave, focused ultrasound, and cryoablation) and newer ablative modalities such as irreversible electroporation. This updated consensus document provides a framework that will facilitate the clearest communication among investigators regarding ablative technologies. An appropriate vehicle is proposed for reporting the various aspects of image-guided ablation therapy including classification of therapies, procedure terms, descriptors of imaging guidance, and terminology for imaging and pathologic findings. Methods are addressed for standardizing reporting of technique, follow-up, complications, and clinical results. As noted in the original document from 2003, adherence to the recommendations will improve the precision of communications in this field, leading to more accurate comparison of technologies and results, and ultimately to improved patient outcomes.

Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria--a 10-year update

Image-guided tumor ablation has become a well-established hallmark of local cancer therapy. The breadth of options available in this growing field increases the need for standardization of terminology and reporting criteria to facilitate effective communication of ideas and appropriate comparison among treatments that use different technologies, such as chemical (eg, ethanol or acetic acid) ablation, thermal therapies (eg, radiofrequency, laser, microwave, focused ultrasound, and cryoablation) and newer ablative modalities such as irreversible electroporation. This updated consensus document provides a framework that will facilitate the clearest communication among investigators regarding ablative technologies. An appropriate vehicle is proposed for reporting the various aspects of image-guided ablation therapy including classification of therapies, procedure terms, descriptors of imaging guidance, and terminology for imaging and pathologic findings. Methods are addressed for standardizing reporting of technique, follow-up, complications, and clinical results. As noted in the original document from 2003, adherence to the recommendations will improve the precision of communications in this field, leading to more accurate comparison of technologies and results, and ultimately to improved patient outcomes. Online supplemental material is available for this article .

Quantification of tissue shrinkage and dehydration caused by microwave ablation: experimental study in kidneys for the estimation of effective coagulation volume

PURPOSE

To quantify the extent of tissue shrinkage and dehydration caused by microwave (MW) ablation in kidneys for estimation of effective coagulation volume.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MW ablations were carried out in ex vivo porcine kidneys. Six study groups were defined: groups 1A, 2A, and 3A for MW ablation (90 W for 5 min, 7.5 min, or 10 min), and groups 1B, 2B, and 3B for control (without MW ablation). Pre- and postinterventional volume analyses were performed. Effective coagulation volumes (original tissue included in coagulation) were determined. Postinterventional dehydration analyses were performed with calculation of mean mass fractions of water.

RESULTS

Mean deployed energies were 21.6 kJ ± 1.1 for group 1A, 29.9 kJ ± 1.0 for group 2A, and 42.1 kJ ± 0.5 kJ for group 3A, and were significantly different (P < .0001). Differences between pre- and postinterventional volumes were -3.8% ± 0.6 for group 1A, -5.6% ± 0.9 for group 2A, and -7.2% ± 0.4 for group 3A, and -1.1% ± 0.3 for group 1B, -1.8% ± 0.4 for group 2B, and -1.1% ± 0.4 for group 3B. Postinterventional volumes were significantly smaller than preinterventional volumes for all groups (P < .01). Underestimations of effective coagulation volume from visualized coagulation volume were 26.1% ± 3.5 for group 1A, 35.2% ± 11.2 for group 2A, and 42.1% ± 4.9 for group 3A, which were significantly different (P < .01). Mean mass fractions of water were 64.2% ± 1.4 for group 1A, 63.2% ± 1.7 for group 2A, and 62.6% ± 1.8% for group 3A, with significant differences versus corresponding control groups (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

For MW ablation in kidneys, underestimation of effective coagulation volume based on visualized coagulation volume is significantly greater with greater deployed energy. Therefore, local dehydration with tissue shrinkage is a potential contributor.