Abstract
Advances in imaging techniques (CT and MRI) and widespread use of imaging especially ultrasound scanning have resulted in a dramatic increase in the detection of small renal masses. While open partial nephrectomy is still the reference standard for the management of these small renal masses, its associated morbidity has encouraged clinicians to exploit the advancements in minimally invasive ablative techniques. The last decade has seen the rapid development of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and novel ablative techniques such as, radiofrequency ablation (RFA), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and cryoablation (CA). In particular, CA for small renal masses has gained popularity as it combines nephron-sparing surgery with a minimally invasive approach. Studies with up to 5-year followup have shown an overall and cancer-specific 5-year survival of 82% and 100%, respectively. This manuscript will focus on the principles and clinical applications of cryoablation of small renal masses, with detailed review of relevant literature.
1. INTRODUCTION
Worldwide, around 208 500 new cases of renal cancer are diagnosed each year, accounting for just under a 2% of all cancers with higher incidence in more developed countries [1–3]. Regardless of its true impact on annual incidence, the widespread use of more sensitive imaging techniques (USS, CT, and MRI) has led to an increase in the number of incidentally detected renal tumors [4–7], with an estimated increased detection of asymptomatic, small renal masses by 60% in recent years [8].
In Europe, the most recent estimates of incidence of renal cancer suggest that there are 63 300 new cases annually in the EU25, accounting for nearly 3% of all cancers [9], with an estimated annual increase in incidence of approximately 2% [2, 10]. In Spain, the estimated incidence and mortality for the year 2002 were 4085 (2778 men, 1307 women) and 1644 (1093 men, 551 women) cases, respectively (FCAECC, La situacion del cancer en España. Ministerio de Sanidad, 2005).
In contrast to a historical incidence of 5% of renal tumours of less than 3 cm in size, current incidence of such tumours ranges between 10% and 40% [11, 12]. Although the natural history and biological behaviour of this “small renal mass” are yet to be understood, the available evidence demonstrates a rather slow growth of these small masses, with an annual size increase not greater of 0.5 cm [13–17]. Furthermore, between 15% and 30% of small renal tumours are confirmed to be benign or to have a low grade and low-malignant potential on pathological examination [18–21].
As a result, urologists now face a subset of early-stage asymptomatic patients with clinical, pathological, and morbid characteristics clearly different from those with a classically presented renal malignancy. The management of this group of patients, while still controversial, has evolved dramatically in recent years. Conservative approach by means of active monitoring or watchful waiting has been advocated by some authors [14, 22–24], and is a feasible option particularly in the elderly and significantly comorbid patient. Surgery, however, is the preferred management option for the younger, healthier patient. In recent years, nephron-sparing surgery (open and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy) has become the standard treatment for small renal masses, with data available from large series confirming similar 5-year cancer-specific survival rates (90%–100%) and a low risk (0%–3%) of local recurrence [25–29]. Although laparoscopic partial nephrectomy has clear advantages over the open approach, particularly on wound-related morbidity, its technical difficulty has limited its widespread use. Consequently, laparoscopic and percutaneous ablative techniques in renal surgery, such as, radio frequency ablation (RFA), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and cryoablation (CA) are being increasingly utilized as they offer parenchymal preservation along with less morbidity. Although long-term oncological data is currently not available, present 5-year followup data is very encouraging. This article will focus on cryoablation (CA) of small renal masses and in particular, on laparoscopic cryoablation (LCA), with an up-to-date review of the available literature and detailed analysis of the largest published series.
2. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Cryoablation has been used in medicine since James Arnott, back in 1845–1851, demonstrated that freezing temperatures could be applied to cause tissue destruction [30]. Further interests in this field with improved delivery system and understanding of freeze-thaw sequence were followed by the use of CA in the treatment of prostate cancer only to be abandoned because of local complications [31–34].
At the turn of the last century, driven by the need for minimally invasive techniques and facilitated by rapid technological developments, a renewed interest on cryoablation and its applications in urological oncology re-emerged. Experience with vacuum-insulated liquid nitrogen or argon-cooled probes in other disciplines and technological advantages in intraoperative imaging [35], laparoscopic USS probes in particular, has allowed a safe and efficient targeting of kidney tumours. As a result, renal cryoablation, either percutaneous or laparoscopic, has become a feasible and exciting new minimally invasive surgical option for the treatment of small masses.
3. CRYOBIOLOGY AND PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF CRYOABLATION
Cryoablation causes tissue destruction by a direct, as well as by a vascular, delayed mechanism [36, 37]. Direct cell damage begins with falling temperatures as structural/functional cell components are stressed and cell metabolism progressively fails. With freezing, ice crystal formation first occurs in the extracellular space, creating a hyperosmotic environment which draws water from the cells and, by a “solution-effect injury,” causes cell shrinkage and membrane damage. With further cooling, especially at high cooling rates, ice crystals will form within the cell. This phenomenon, possibly facilitated by cell-to-cell propagation via intercellular channels [38], is almost always lethal to the cell. While some cells will contain ice crystals at temperatures as high as −15°C, certainty of intracellular ice formation requires temperatures below −40°C (homogeneous nucleation) [37, 39]. During thawing, with temperatures above −40°C, ice crystals fuse into larger crystals (“recrystallization”) which, together with a transient hypotonic extracellular environment that draws water back into the cell, will result in further damage of the cell membrane and membrane rupture.
Indirectly, hypoxic damage occurs as a result of microvascular stasis. With lowering temperatures, initial vasoconstriction produces a decrease in blood flow, with complete cessation during freezing. During thawing, the circulation returns with transient vasodilatation. Endothelial damage produces increased permeability, oedema, platelet aggregation, and formation of thrombi, resulting in a sustained microvascular occlusion and stagnation [40, 41].
While downregulation of tumour suppressor genes essential to the control of apoptosis has been implicated in most malignancies and proapoptotic factors such as hypothermia, ischaemia, inflammation, elevated calcium levels, immunologic-based mechanisms including macrophage recruitment are associated with freezing injury. Recent studies implicate gene regulated cell death (apoptosis) in cryosurgical outcomes [42, 43].
The histological end result is a confluent coagulative necrosis, as evidenced by the presence of numerous histiocytes, cholesterol crystals, and dystrophic calcification within the cryolesion, with eventual fibrosis and scarring. Features that have been demonstrated in animal models [44, 45] as well as in human renal cryoablated tumours [46, 47].
4. TECHNICAL PRINCIPLES OF CRYOABLATION
Renal cryoablation has been shown to produce predictable and reproducible tissue destruction in animal models [48–53]. Cell damage depends on the cooling rate, the number of freeze-thaw cycles [45], the lowest temperatures achieved as well as the hold time at subzero temperatures [37, 54]. Importantly, while temperature below −19.4°C has been shown to be sufficient for complete destruction of normal renal parenchyma [48], neoplastic cells may require temperatures as low as −50°C to guarantee cell death [37]. Moreover, preclinical models have demonstrated that such low temperatures can only be achieved within a core volume of tissue, limited to 4 to 6 mm inside the edge of the forming ice ball [48, 49]. Thus, most authors will extend the ice ball to 1 cm beyond the tumour margins, incorporating the outer few millimetres or “indeterminate zone” and a margin of normal renal parenchyma, to optimize oncological control [55].
Modern cryoprobes can achieve temperatures as low as −190°C by exploiting the Joule-Thompson effect. Typically, compressed argon gas is allowed to expand through a small orifice, producing temperatures well below those required to ablate normal renal tissue (−19.4°C) [48] and cancer cells (−40°C), as demonstrated on in vivo prostatic [56] and renal cryolesions [45]. Although, the number of cycles is still controversial, early data from in vivo experiments [37] has now been corroborated in cryoablated tumours. With the incorporation of double-freeze cycles, a larger cryolesion can be achieved than with a single cycle. Apart of the number of cycles and in contrast to original experimental observations, it has been demonstrated that rapid thawing, with helium gas at 15°C to 20°C/min, does not infringe on lesion size, while reducing procedural time [45].
5. CLINICAL APPLICATION OF RENAL CRYOABLATION
Following the first experimental renal cryosurgery by Lutzeyer et al. [57, 58], it was not until 1995 that Uchida et al. performed the first reported percutaneous cryoablation in canine kidneys and, later that year, reproduced the technique in 2 patients with advanced renal carcinoma [59]. CA has developed rapidly since and can currently be delivered via open, laparoscopic and percutaneous approaches.
6. OPEN CA
Feasibility of open renal cryotherapy in humans was first reported in 1996 by Delworth et al., at the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, after a successful treatment of two patients with tumours in a solitary kidney, one renal cell carcinoma and one angiomyolipoma [60]. Rukstalis et al. published in 2001 the first report on systematic use of this approach [61]. A total of 29 tumours (22 solid masses and 7 complex cysts) with a median size of 2.2 cm were treated using intraoperative ultrasound monitoring and double-freeze sequences. With a median followup of 16 months, only one patient had a biopsy-confirmed recurrent tumour. Five serious adverse events occurred in 5 patients, with only one event directly related to the procedure. Overall, 91.3% of patients demonstrated a complete radiographic response [61]. In 2002, Khorsandi et al. reported open cryoablation on 17 patients with small renal tumours (median 2 cm; range: 1.1–4.2 cm), using a double freeze-thaw technique to −180°C. Median age was 62 years (range: 35–75 years). With a median followup of 30 months (range: 10–60 months), MRI demonstrated infarction and a reduction of lesion size in 15 of 16 cases. One patient's mass was unchanged at 3 months followup [62].
Whilst open CA offers safe parenchymal preservation, wound morbidity appears to be the drawback of this technique. With only two further reports in the literature [63, 64], practice in recent years has clearly favoured the laparoscopic and percutaneous approaches, with a marked trend towards the former.
7. LAPAROSCOPIC CA (LCA)
Laparoscopic cryoablation (LCA) offers several procedural advantages, namely, a minimally invasive approach, magnification, direct visualization of the tumour and internal manipulation of the cryoprobes and dual (visual and ultrasound) monitoring of the cryolesion [65] as well as allowing extensive pathologic sampling [66]. Surgeon preference and experience are crucial for choosing between transperitoneal and retroperineoscopic approaches. While transperitoneal approach allows a more direct access to anterior tumours, it carries a higher risk of bowel injury. Posteriorly located tumours are more amenable to retroperineoscopy, however, blunt dissection in this approach is associated with an increased risk of bleeding [12].
In our experience at Sunderland Royal Hospital, from September 2005, 17 patients have undergone LCA under a strict departmental protocol. Patient is positioned in lateral position as for nephrectomy. We used one 10 mm port for camera and two working ports (10 and 5 mm). Depending on the position of the tumour, we have used a further 5 mm port to retract the liver. Following adequate pneumoperitoneum, kidney is mobilised in order to access the tumour favourably for the needle insertion and for ultrasound probe positioning. Gerota's fascia and peri-renal fat are carefully dissected to expose the tumour. A standard biopsy of the tumour is then performed. Cryoprobes (17G) are inserted under visual and ultrasound control (Figure 1), at a maximum distance of 1 cm apart from each other. Tumour core temperature and tumour margin temperature are monitored throughout. Our protocol includes 2 Freeze-Thaw cycles: Freezing, during 10 minutes, achieving a core temperature of −70°C and a peripheral temperature of at least −40°C, followed by of 10 minutes of thawing (5 minutes active + 5 minutes passive thawing). The ice-ball is monitored visually by the surgeon and by real-time laparoscopic USS probe (Hitachi) performed by an expert consultant uroradiologist (Figure 2). The ice-ball is extended to a minimum of 5 mm beyond the tumour margins. Following surgery, our preferred imaging modality is pre- and postcontrast CT, which is performed as part of our followup protocol at 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 and yearly thereafter. Renal function is checked at each clinic visit. Since majority of recurrences are found at 3 months and almost all at 1 year, CT or MRI at 3, 6, 12 months and yearly thereafter has been recommended by other authors [67].
Figure 1.
Ultrasound scanning of an exophytic left renal tumour exposed by laparoscopic mobilisation prior to cryoablation.
Figure 2.
Visualisation of the Ice-ball during thawing, demonstrating arrangement of cryoprobes and temperature monitoring probes.
No treatment failures have been so far observed. Twelve masses (70%) were demonstrated to be a RCC. Histology in one patient revealed urothelial carcinoma necessitating nephroureterectomy. One patient required transfusion and another underwent embolisation of an arterio-venous fistula.
A comprehensive review of the literature reveals promising results. A summary of outcomes for the larger series is summarised in Table 1.
Table 1.
Summary of largest reported series on LCA.
n | Age, years | Follow-up, months | Tumour diameter, cm | % of RCC | Failures/ Recurrences | Operative time, min. | Hospital stay, days | Complications | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lee et al. [68] | 20 | 67.9 (43–84) | 20.3 (1–40) | 2.6 (1.4–4.5) | 55% | 1/0 | 305.9 | 2.6 | Atrial fibrilation (1), ECG changes, no MI (1), Pancreatic injury (1), transient raised lipase-amylase (5), Transfusion (1) |
| |||||||||
Nadler et al. [69] | 15 | 68.5 (49–86) | 15 (4.9–27) | 2.15 (1.2–3.2) | 67% | 1/1 | 3.5 | Respiratory failure (1), prolonged ileus (1) | |
| |||||||||
Schwartz et al. § [71] | 70 | 67 (32–85) | 10 (3–36) | 2.6 (1.2–4.7) | 59% | 1/1 | 2.2 | CVA (1), transfusion (2), renal fracture (1), Transient hydronephrosis (1) | |
| |||||||||
Cestari et al. [72] | 70 | 63.2 | 36 (28–48) | 2.37 (1–6) | 69% | 0/1 | 181.4 | 4.5 | Haematuria (2), pyrexia (6), bleeding (1), Anaemia (6), Pulmonar oedema (1), PUJ Obstruction |
| |||||||||
Hegarty et al. [73] | 60 | 72 | 2.3 (1–4.5) | 0/3 | 174.2 | 2.4 | 2% transfusion rate. Congestive Heart Failure (1), Splenic haematoma (1), oesophagitis (1), Pleural effusion (1) | ||
| |||||||||
Moon et al. [74] | 16 | 9.6 (1–28) | 2.6 (1.5–3.5) | 33% | 0/0 | 188 | 1.9 | Pneumonia (1) | |
| |||||||||
Polascik et al. [76] | 26 | 64 (44–79) | 20.9 (2–53) | 2.5 (1–3.5) | 0/0 | 2 (0–9)* | Transfusion (1), prolonged ileus (1) | ||
| |||||||||
Beemster et al. [77] | 26 | 17.2 (6–36) | 2.4 (1.3–3.8) | 1/0 | Paraesthesia (1), UTI (1), pneumonia |
n: Number of patients.
RCC: Renal cell carcinomas found on histology.
Values expressed as mean unless stated otherwise.
§Total of 84 cases in this series. Only 70 of them were performed laparoscopically.
*Value expressed as median.
In 2003, Lee et al. reported results of LCA with ultrasound guidance, double-freeze cycle and up to 3-years followup (mean 20.25 months), in 20 patients with small renal masses (1.4–4.5 cm) and age ranging from 43 to 84 years. Mean operating time was 305.9 minutes and blood loss 92.5 mL (50–200 mL). Biopsies demonstrated renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in 11 cases, none of which had recurred. Overall survival was 100% for this cohort [68].
In the same year, Nadler et al. reported results on 15 patients. Mean age was 68.5 years (range: 49–86 years). Mean tumour size was 2.15 cm (range: 1.2–3.2 cm), and mean estimated blood loss was 67 mL (range: 15–125 mL). RCC was demonstrated in 10 cases. Median radiographic followup (15 months, range 4.9–27 months) revealed stable lesions in all patients. There was 1 treatment failure due to incomplete treatment of the periphery of the lesion. Another patient, with a successfully treated tumour, had a positive followup biopsy due to multifocal papillary renal cell carcinoma and required nephrectomy [69].
Initial data from the Southern Illinois University was published in 2005, a total of 25 patients with an average age of 65 years (range: 32–83 years) and mean tumour size of 2.4 cm (range: 1.5–3.6 cm). Pathology revealed RCC in 72% of cases. With a followup for up to 36 months (range: 6–36 months), no recurrences were reported [70]. Subsequent publication including 84 consecutive patients with an average age of 67 years and a mean tumour size of 2.6 cm (range: 1.2-4.7 cm) of which, 70 procedures were performed laparoscopically. They reported 7 conversions, 2 of them for failures. Intraoperative biopsy yielded a 59% malignancy rate. With a mean followup of 10 months (range: 3–36 months), an abnormal postoperative enhancement occurred in 2 patients, one of which was confirmed to be a RCC [71].
Cestari et al. presented data from a cohort of 70 patients treated with laparoscopic (48 transperitoneal, 28 retroperineoscopic) cryoablation (LCA). Average age was 63.2 years, mean size 2.37 cm (range: 1–6 cm), mean operating time and blood loss were 181.4 minutes and 164.2 mL, respectively. With a followup of up to 36 months, progressive reduction of the cryolesion was demonstrated in all patients on MRI. Only 1 patient required radical nephrectomy for recurrent tumour [72].
In 2005, with 168 cases performed at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation (1997–2005), Hegarty et al. reported, prospectively collected, intermediate-term (3 years) followup data in 56 patients, with a mean tumour size of 2.3 cm, who underwent LCA under a strict MRI imaging and CT-guided biopsy followup protocol, introduced in 1997. Sequential mean cryolesion size on MRI on postoperative 1 day, at 3 and 6 months, and at 1, 2, and 3 years was 3.7, 2.8, 2.3, 1.7, 1.2, and 0.9 cm, representing a 26%, 39%, 56%, 69%, and 75% reduction in cryolesion size at 3 and 6 months and 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. At 3 years, 17 cryolesions (38%) had completely disappeared on MRI. Postoperative needle biopsy identified locally persistent/recurrent renal tumour in 2 patients. In the 51 patients undergoing cryotherapy for a unilateral, sporadic renal tumour 3-year cancer specific survival was 98%. There was no open conversion. During the 2006 AUA Meeting, this group presented updated results on 60 patients that had each completed 5 years followup (median 72 months). Mean tumour size was 2.3 cm (range 1–4.5 cm). Three patients (6.7%) developed local recurrence. Overall and cancer-specific 5-year survival was 82% and 100%, respectively [73].
Moon et al. published results on 16 patients with small renal masses (mean size 2.6 cm), and their mean operating time was 188 minutes. There was 1 reported conversion, and mean blood loss was 40 mL. Tumour biopsy demonstrated 5 RCC. With a mean followup of 9.6 months, all tumours remained nonenhancing and either stable or smaller than the original lesion [74]. This group has recently reported combined data from its 5-year experience with renal cryoablation on 88 cases, treated by LCA [58] or PCA [20]. Mean tumour size was 2.6 cm. At a mean followup of 19 months, the overall, cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival rates were 88.5%, 100%, and 98.7%, respectively. Four patients required a further treatment due to persistent disease, and one had progression to locally advanced disease [75].
In 2007 Polascik et al. published results from his experience in 26 patients who underwent LCA using third-generation cryotechnology, for 28 renal masses of 3.5 cm or less (median 2 cm). Patients were followed by serial CT or MRI scan, at least every six months after cryoablation. The mean patient age was 64 years (range: 44–79), and the mean followup was 20.9 months. The median tumour size was 2.0 cm (range: 1–3.5 cm). No patient was converted to open surgery. With an overall survival rate of 100%, no evidence of recurrence or progression was found in this cohort [76].
With 47 cases in their series, Beemster et al., from the University of Amsterdam group, have now published data on 26 patients with available followup of 6 months or more. With an average followup of 17.2 months (range: 6–36 months) and a mean tumour size of 2.4 cm (range: 1.3–3.8 cm), only 1 treatment failure has been reported [77].
In agreement with data generated by larger series, preliminary results from smaller series have recently been published [78–81]. Although comprising smaller number of patients and limited followup in some cases, the published series clearly demonstrate the increasing interest and rapid expansion of this novel ablative technique.
8. PERCUTANEOUS CRYOABLATION (PCA)
While technical limitations hampered initial attempts at percutaneous cryoablation in human kidneys [59], the rapid development of argon technology and ultrathin probes, together with CT and open access interventional MRI, allowing real-time monitoring of the ice ball, provided the much needed technical breakthroughs, making this approach safe and reproducible.
In 2001, Shingleton and Sewell [82] reported their initial experience in 20 patients (22 tumours) treated with 2 or 3 mm cryoprobes and interventional MRI. Mean tumour size was 3 cm (range: 1.8–7 cm), and average treatment time was 97 minutes (range: 56–172 minutes). Procedures were performed under general anaesthesia or sedation, and 95% of patients were discharged within 24 hours. With a mean followup of 9.1 months (range: 3–14 months), they reported only one failure, requiring retreatment. The only complication was a superficial wound abscess. Recently, the authors have updated their series including patients with von Hipple-Lindau [83] and with tumour/s in a solitary kidney [84]. With an average followup of 24 months, 9 (15%) cases required retreatment due to incomplete initial ablation. Only 1 patient required transfusion, and there were no reported cancer-related deaths.
Experience on 23 patients (26 tumours) with mean size 2.6 cm (range: 1–4.6 cm) and mean age of 66 years (range: 43–86 years) was reported by Silverman et al., using a 0.5-T open MR imaging system and general anesthesia. Twenty four masses were RCCs, 1 was an urothelial carcinoma and 1 was an angiomyolipoma. With a mean followup of 14 months (range: 4–30 months), 24/26 tumours were successfully ablated, 23 of which required only one treatment session. In 2 cases, a small enhancing nodule located at the margin proved to be recurrent tumours. Two complications (1 haemorrhage requiring transfusion and 1 abscess drained percutaneously) occurred in a total of 27 cryoablations [85].
In 2006 Gupta et al. published CT-guided PCA on 27 tumours of 5 cm or less (mean size 2.5 cm), using conscious sedation and real-time CT monitoring. With 1 month or more followup imaging available on 16 cases (mean 5.9 months), 15 tumours showed no signs of enhancement. In 1 case, blood transfusion was required for bleeding [86].
The Mayo Clinic experience on 40 cases of PCA with CT monitoring has recently been published [87]. Mean tumour size was 4.2 cm (range: 3.0–7.2 cm) and at least 3 months followup was available in 65% of the cases (mean 9 months; range: 3–22 months). Technical success, defined as extension of the ice ball beyond the tumour margin and absence of postablation enhancement on CT, was reported in 38 (95%) cases, with no tumour recurrence or progression in the cohort. Overall complication rate for this cohort was reported at 8%.
9. FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Initial studies of combination therapy with 5-FU prior to freezing, indicated a temperature-dependent reduction on cell viability in a prostate cancer cell (PC-3) model [88]. Furthermore, molecular analysis using this model has demonstrated a synergistic effect of sublethal concentrations of 5-FU and Cisplatin prior to freezing (−15°C), mediated by a shift in the Bcl-2 to Bax ratio to a prodeath tendency [89]. Similar synergistic response has been reported in a renal cell model, the data suggesting that 5-FU chemotherapy may be more effective when followed by cryosurgery [90]. In the clinical setting, synergistic activity of cryoablation and cyclophosphamide is currently been evaluated on advanced epithelial tumours (NCI. Trial protocol NCT00499733).
Equally, since freezing enhances the radiosentitivity of cells, combination of radiotherapy with cryoablation may potentially confer benefits [65], as already indicated in preclinical models of prostate cancer, where adjuvant radiation and curcumin have demonstrated a synergistic effect with cryoablation [91].
At the time of writing this review, the Cleveland Clinic group have made public the initial results employing Single Port Access Renal Cryoablation (SPARC). A total of 6 patients, with mean tumour size of 2.6 ± 0.4 cm, successfully underwent SPARC, via a transperitoneal or retroperitoneal approach, with no intraoperative complications and no need for conversion, demonstrating the feasibility and safety of this, potentially scarless, procedure [92, 93].
Further development of imaging techniques and cryoprobe technology, clinical evaluation of combination therapy with conventional chemo- and radiotherapy, together with promising novel cryoenhancers, may have major implications on the management of small renal masses in the future
10. CONCLUSIONS
Widespread implementation of USS, CT, and MRI has resulted in an increased detection of early, small renal masses. In the last 20 years, the proportion of incidentally found renal tumours raised from 13% to an estimated 60%, with a substantial parallel decrease in tumour stage, grade, and proportion of metastasis at presentation, in these patients [94]. As a result, urologists are now faced with a new cohort of asymptomatic, healthier patients, with incidentally found small renal masses.
While open partial nephrectomy is still the reference standard [95], its associated morbidity has encouraged researchers and practicing clinicians towards less radical approaches, thus the rapid development of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and novel ablative techniques such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), and cryoablation (CA). Among ablative techniques, cryotherapy, and in particular laparoscopic cryoablation, is the most extensively studied and the one with more rapid expansion in clinical practice.
Cryosurgery offers the clear advantage of combining a nephron-sparing surgery together with a minimally invasive approach. Anaesthetic requirements, postoperative analgesia, and hospital stay are significantly reduced, with a much rapid return to normal activity and work.
In the early days of development and clinical implementation of cryoablation, concerns were raised regarding safety of the procedure, the lack of followup, and oncological outcome [96].
Regarding the safety of the procedure, published studies up to this day have shown minimal procedure-specific morbidity, with complication rates comparable or better than current available minimally invasive procedures. Reports from the largest series have demonstrated to be a less morbid procedure than laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, with a comparable 5-year oncological safety [97].
Among the novel ablative techniques, radio frequency ablation (RFA) is the procedures with more emerging clinical data. Although the procedure-specific morbidity, mostly based on small and nonstandardised series, appears to be low, serious issues have been raised regarding the RFA cell-killing potential and its higher risk of local disease recurrence, as demonstrated en several clinical studies [98–102].
When compared to RFA, available data from preclinical [52] and several clinical studies confer to cryoablation an advantageous oncological safety profile. The Cleveland Clinic group have recently published results from their RFA and LCA series, highlighting the issue of residual disease and demonstrating a clear advantage in the LCA cohort. With 109 renal lesions (88 patients) treated with RFA and 192 lesions (176 patients) treated with LCA, radiographic (CT or MRI) success at 6 months was 85% and 90% for RFA and LCA, respectively. More importantly, when lesions were later biopsied at 6 months, the success in the RFA cohort decreased to 64.8%, while LCA success remained high at 93.8%. Six of 13 patients (46.2%) with a 6-month positive biopsy after radio frequency ablation demonstrated no enhancement on posttreatment MRI or CT, while in the LCA group, all positive biopsies revealed posttreatment enhancement on imaging just before biopsy. The authors recommend postradio frequency ablation followup biopsy due to the significant risk of residual renal cell cancer without radiographic evidence [103].
Supporting these findings, a recent meta-analysis of available data demonstrates a higher risk of local disease recurrence in tumours treated with RFA, when compared to those managed by cryoablation [104].
While long-term followup is still awaited, encouraging results have been reported in series with up to 5-year followup, with cancer-specific survival rates ranging from 98 to 100% [68, 70, 72, 73, 76, 105] with LCA and 97% with PCA [7]. This is comparable to 5-year cancer-specific survival rate of 92%, reported with partial nephrectomy [95, 97, 106].
While clinical application and indications of cryoablation of small renal masses are still not clearly defined, it is recommended by available clinical evidence, that CA should be reserved for small (<3 cm) solid-enhancing renal masses in older patients with high operative risk. Young age, tumour size >4 cm, hilar tumours, intrarenal tumours, and cystic lesions can be regarded as relative contraindication, whilst irreversible coagulopathy is widely accepted as an absolute contraindication [107].
References
- 1. European Network of Cancer Registries. Eurocin version 4.0. European incidence database v2.3 ed, Lyon, 2001.
- 2.Ljungberg B, Hanbury DC, Kuczyk MA, et al. Guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. European Association of Urology Guidelines, 2007.
- 3.Lindblad P, Adami HO. Kidney cancer. In: Adami HO, Hunter D, Trichopoulos D, editors. Textbook of Cancer Epidemiology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Rauch MK, Belldegrun A. Incidental renal tumors. Urology. 2000;56(2):190–196. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00655-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Belldegrun AS. The changing natural history of renal cell carcinoma. The Journal of Urology. 2001;166(5):1611–1623. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Van Poppel H, Dilen K, Baert L. Incidental renal cell carcinoma and nephron sparing surgery. Current Opinion in Urology. 2001;11(3):281–286. doi: 10.1097/00042307-200105000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Mouraviev V, Joniau S, Van Poppel H, Polascik TJ. Current status of minimally invasive ablative techniques in the treatment of small renal tumours. European Urology. 2007;51(2):328–336. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.09.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Chow W-H, Devesa SS, Warren JL, Fraumeni JF., Jr Rising incidence of renal cell cancer in the United States. Journal of the American Medical Association. 1999;281(17):1628–1631. doi: 10.1001/jama.281.17.1628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ferlay J, Autier P, Boniol M, Heanue M, Colombet M, Boyle P. Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006. Annals of Oncology. 2007;18(3):581–592. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdl498. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.EUCAN EUCAN 1998 estimates, 1998, http://www-dep.iarc.fr/eucan/eucan.htm.
- 11.Smith SJ, Bosniak MA, Megibow AJ, Hulnick DH, Horii SC, Raghavendra BN. Renal cell carcinoma: earlier discovery and increased detection. Radiology. 1989;170(3):699–703. doi: 10.1148/radiology.170.3.2644658. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Perry K, Zisman A, Pantuck AJ, Janzen N, Schulam P, Belldegrun AS. Laparoscopic and percutaneous ablative techniques in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Reviews in Urology. 2002;4(3):103–111. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Bosniak MA, Birnbaum BA, Krinsky GA, Waisman J. Small renal parenchymal neoplasms: further observations on growth. Radiology. 1995;197(3):589–597. doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480724. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Wehle MJ, Thiel DD, Petrou SP, Young PR, Frank I, Karsteadt N. Conservative management of incidental contrast-enhancing renal masses as safe alternative to invasive therapy. Urology. 2004;64(1):49–52. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.02.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Kato M, Suzuki T, Suzuki Y, Terasawa Y, Sasano H, Arai Y. Natural history of small renal cell carcinoma: evaluation of growth rate, histological grade, cell proliferation and apoptosis. The Journal of Urology. 2004;172(3):863–866. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000136315.80057.99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kassouf W, Aprikian AG, Laplante M, Tanguay S. Natural history of renal masses followed expectantly. The Journal of Urology. 2004;171(1):111–113. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000102409.69570.f5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Abou Youssif T, Kassouf W, Steinberg J, Aprikian AG, Laplante MP, Tanguay S. Active surveillance for selected patients with renal masses: updated results with long-term follow-up. Cancer. 2007;110(5):1010–1014. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22871. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Frank I, Blute ML, Cheville JC, Lohse CM, Weaver AL, Zincke H. Solid renal tumors: an analysis of pathological features related to tumor size. The Journal of Urology. 2003;170(6, part 1):2217–2220. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000095475.12515.5e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Remzi M, Özsoy M, Klingler H-C, et al. Are small renal tumors harmless? Analysis of histopathological features according to tumors 4 cm or less in diameter. The Journal of Urology. 2006;176(3):896–899. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.04.047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Pahernik S, Ziegler S, Roos F, Melchior SW, Thüroff JW. Small renal tumors: correlation of clinical and pathological features with tumor size. The Journal of Urology. 2007;178(2):414–417. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.03.129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Gill IS, Matin SF, Desai MM, et al. Comparative analysis of laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for renal tumors in 200 patients. The Journal of Urology. 2003;170(1):64–68. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000072272.02322.ff. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Bosniak MA. Observation of small incidentally detected renal masses. Seminars in Urologic Oncology. 1995;13(4):267–272. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Marshall FF. Conservative management of incidental contrast-enhancing renal masses as safe alternative to invasive therapy. The Journal of Urology. 2005;174(3):868–869. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000171854.39368.f6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Kouba E, Smith A, McRackan D, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS. Watchful waiting for solid renal masses: insight into the natural history and results of delayed intervention. The Journal of Urology. 2007;177(2):466–470. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.09.064. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Novick AC, Streem S, Montie JE, et al. Conservative surgery for renal cell carcinoma: a single-center experience with 100 patients. The Journal of Urology. 1989;141(4):835–839. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)41026-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Belldegrun A, Tsui K-H, deKernion JB, Smith RB. Efficacy of nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma: analysis based on the new 1997 tumor-node-metastasis staging system. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1999;17(9):2868–2875. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.9.2868. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Uzzo RG, Novick AC. Nephron sparing surgery for renal tumors: indications, techniques and outcomes. The Journal of Urology. 2001;166(1):6–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Novick AC. Nephron-sparing surgery for renal cell carcinoma. Annual Review of Medicine. 2002;53:393–407. doi: 10.1146/annurev.med.53.082901.103937. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Desai MM, Aron M, Gill IS. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic cryoablation for the small renal tumor. Urology. 2005;66(5, supplement 1):23–28. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.114. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Arnott J. Practical illustrations of the remedial efficacy of a very low or anaesthetic temperature—I: in cancer. The Lancet. 1850;56(1409):257–259. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Cooper IS, Lee AJ. Cryostatic congelation: a system for producing a limited, controlled region of cooling or freezing of biological tissue. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 1961;133(3):259–263. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Gage AA, Koepf S, Wehrle D, Emmings F. Cryotherapy for cancer of the lip and oral cavity. Cancer. 1965;18(12):1646–1651. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(196512)18:12<1646::aid-cncr2820181221>3.0.co;2-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Cooper IS. Cryogenic surgery for cancer. Federation Proceedings. 1965;24:S237–S240. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Cahan W. Cryosurgery of malignant and benign tumors. Federation Proceedings. 1965;24:S241–S248. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Onik GM, Reyes G, Cohen JK, Porterfield B. Ultrasound characteristics of renal cryosurgery. Urology. 1993;42(2):212–215. doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(93)90651-p. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Baust J, Gage AA, Ma H, Zhang C-M. Minimally invasive cryosurgery—technological advances. Cryobiology. 1997;34(4):373–384. doi: 10.1006/cryo.1997.2017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Gage AA, Baust J. Mechanisms of tissue injury in cryosurgery. Cryobiology. 1998;37(3):171–186. doi: 10.1006/cryo.1998.2115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Berger WK, Uhrík B. Freeze-induced shrinkage of individual cells and cell-to-cell propagation of intracellular ice in cell chains from salivary glands. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences. 1996;52(9):843–850. doi: 10.1007/BF01938868. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Whittaker DK. Ice crystals formed in tissue during cryosurgery—II: electron microscopy. Cryobiology. 1974;11(3):202–217. doi: 10.1016/0011-2240(74)90094-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Whittaker DK. Vascular responses in the oral mucosa following cryosurgery. Journal of Periodontal Research. 1977;12(1):55–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.1977.tb00109.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Whittaker DK. Mechanisms of tissue destruction following cryosurgery. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. 1984;66(5):313–318. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Nagle WA, Soloff BL, Moss AJ, Jr, Henle KJ. Cultured Chinese hamster cells undergo apoptosis after exposure to cold but nonfreezing temperatures. Cryobiology. 1990;27(4):439–451. doi: 10.1016/0011-2240(90)90021-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Baust JG, Gage AA, Clarke D, Baust JM, Van Buskirk R. Cryosurgery—a putative approach to molecular-based optimization. Cryobiology. 2004;48(2):190–204. doi: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2004.01.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Bishoff JT, Chen RB, Lee BR, et al. Laparoscopic renal cryoablation: acute and long-term clinical, radiographic, and pathologic effects in an animal model and application in a clinical trial. Journal of Endourology. 1999;13(4):233–239. doi: 10.1089/end.1999.13.233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Woolley ML, Schulsinger DA, Durand DB, Zeltser IS, Waltzer WC. Effect of freezing parameters (freeze cycle and thaw process) on tissue destruction following renal cryoablation. Journal of Endourology. 2002;16(7):519–522. doi: 10.1089/089277902760367494. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Jang TL, Wang R, Kim SC, Troe T, Pins MR, Nadler RB. Histopathology of human renal tumors after laparoscopic renal cryosurgery. The Journal of Urology. 2005;173(3):720–724. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000152539.41611.c6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Edmunds TB, Jr, Schulsinger DA, Durand DB, Waltzer WC. Acute histologic changes in human renal tumors after cryoablation. Journal of Endourology. 2000;14(2):139–143. doi: 10.1089/end.2000.14.139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Chosy SG, Nakada SY, Lee FT, Jr, Warner TF. Monitoring renal cryosurgery: predictors of tissue necrosis in swine. The Journal of Urology. 1998;159(4):1370–1374. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(01)63618-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Campbell SC, Krishnamurthi V, Chow G, Hale J, Myles J, Novick AC. Renal cryosurgery: experimental evaluation of treatment parameters. Urology. 1998;52(1):29–34. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00169-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Nakada SY, Lee FT, Jr, Warner T, Chosy SG, Moon TD. Laparoscopic cryosurgery of the kidney in the porcine model: an acute histological study. Urology. 1998;51(5, supplement 1):161–166. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(98)00080-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Nakada SY, Lee FT, Jr, Warner TF, Chosy SG, Moon TD. Laparoscopic renal cryotherapy in swine: comparison of puncture cryotherapy preceded by arterial embolization and contact cryotherapy. Journal of Endourology. 1998;12(6):567–573. doi: 10.1089/end.1998.12.567. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Collyer WC, Landman J, Olweny EO, et al. Comparison of renal ablation with cryotherapy, dry radiofrequency, and saline augmented radiofrequency in a porcine model. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 2001;193(5):505–513. doi: 10.1016/s1072-7515(01)01050-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Auge BK, Santa-Cruz RW, Polascik TJ. Effect of freeze time during renal cryoablation: a swine model. Journal of Endourology. 2006;20(12):1101–1105. doi: 10.1089/end.2006.20.1101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Finelli A, Rewcastle JC, Jewett MAS. Cryotherapy and radiofrequency ablation: pathophysiologic basis and laboratory studies. Current Opinion in Urology. 2003;13(3):187–191. doi: 10.1097/00042307-200305000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Lin C-H, Moinzadeh A, Ramani AP, Gill IS. Histopathologic confirmation of complete cancer cell kill in excised specimens after renal cryotherapy. Urology. 2004;64(3):590 pages. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.05.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Larson TR, Rrobertson DW, Corica A, Bostwick DG. In vivo interstitial temperature mapping of the human prostate during cryosurgery with correlation to histopathologic outcomes. Urology. 2000;55(4):547–552. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00590-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Lutzeyer W, Lymberopoulos S, Breining H, Langer S. Experimentelle kryochirurgie der niere. Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery. 1968;322(1):843–847. doi: 10.1007/BF02453942. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Lutzeyer W. Fortschritte in der operativen Therapie (Urologie) Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery. 1972;332(1):137–145. doi: 10.1007/BF01282622. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Uchida M, Imaide Y, Sugimoto K, Uehara H, Watanabe H. Percutaneous cryosurgery for renal tumours. British Journal of Urology. 1995;75(2):132–137. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1995.tb07297.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Delworth MG, Pisters LL, Fornage BD, von Eschenbach AC. Cryotherapy for renal cell carcinoma and angiomyolipoma. The Journal of Urology. 1996;155(1):252–255. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Rukstalis DB, Khorsandi M, Garcia FU, Hoenig DM, Cohen JK. Clinical experience with open renal cryoablation. Urology. 2001;57(1):34–39. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00878-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Khorsandi M, Foy RC, Chong W, Hoenig DM, Cohen JK, Rukstalis DB. Preliminary experience with cryoablation of renal lesions smaller than 4 centimeters. The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association. 2002;102(5):277–281. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Rodriguez R, Chan DY, Bishoff JT, et al. Renal ablative cryosurgery in selected patients with peripheral renal masses. Urology. 2000;55(1):25–30. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00394-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Cohen J, Belldegrun A. Cryosurgical ablation of renal tumors using 1.5-millimeter, ultrathin cryoprobes. Urology. 2002;59(1):130–133. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)01502-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Gill IS. Renal cryotherapy: pro. Urology. 2005;65(3):415–418. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.10.036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Pattaras JG, Marshall FF. Percutaneous cryoablation of renal tumors: limitations and uncertainties. Nature Clinical Practice Urology. 2005;2(11):518–519. doi: 10.1038/ncpuro0325. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Matin SF, Ahrar K, Cadeddu JA, et al. Residual and recurrent disease following renal energy ablative therapy: a multi-institutional study. The Journal of Urology. 2006;176(5):1973–1977. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.07.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Lee DI, McGinnis DE, Feld R, Strup SE. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic cryoablation of small renal tumors: intermediate results. Urology. 2003;61(1):83–88. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(02)02004-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Nadler RB, Kim SC, Rubenstein JN, Yap RL, Campbell SC, User HM. Laparoscopic renal cryosurgery: the Northwestern experience. The Journal of Urology. 2003;170(4, part 1):1121–1125. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000088020.00147.8d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Powell T, Whelan C, Schwartz BF. Laparoscopic renal cryotherapy: biology, techniques and outcomes. Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica. 2005;57(2):109–118. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Schwartz BF, Rewcastle JC, Powell T, Whelan C, Manny T, Jr, Vestal JC. Cryoablation of small peripheral renal masses: a retrospective analysis. Urology. 2006;68(1, supplement 1):14–18. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.03.067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Cestari A, Guazzoni G, Naspro R, Maga T, Dell'acqua V, Rigatti P. Laparoscopic renal cryoablation (LRC) of small renal masses: lesson learned after 70 procedures. European Urology Supplements. 2006;5(2):220 pages. [Google Scholar]
- 73.Hegarty NJ, Gill IS, Kaouk JH, et al. Renal cryoablation: 5 year outcomes. The Journal of Urology. 2006;175:351 pages. [Google Scholar]
- 74.Moon TD, Lee FT, Jr, Hedican SP, Lowry P, Nakada SY. Laparoscopic cryoablation under sonographic guidance for the treatment of small renal tumors. Journal of Endourology. 2004;18(5):436–440. doi: 10.1089/0892779041271607. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75.Bandi G, Wen CC, Hedican SP, Moon TD, Lee FT, Jr, Nakada SY. Cryoablation of small renal masses: assessment of the outcome at one institution. BJU International. 2007;100(4):798–801. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07158.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Polascik TJ, Nosnik I, Mayes JM, Mouraviev V. Short term clinical outcome after laparoscopic cryoablation of the renal tumor ≤ 3.5 cm. Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment. 2007;6(6):621–624. doi: 10.1177/153303460700600605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Beemster P, Phoa S, Wijkstra H, de la Rosette J, Laguna P. Follow-up of renal masses after cryosurgery using computed tomography; enhancement patterns and cryolesion size. BJU International. 2008;101(10):1237–1242. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07437.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Colón I, Fuchs GJ. Early experience with laparoscopic cryoablation in patients with small renal tumors and severe comorbidities. Journal of Endourology. 2003;17(6):415–423. doi: 10.1089/089277903767923227. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79.Gore JL, Kim HL, Schulam P. Initial experience with laparoscopically assisted percutaneous cryotherapy of renal tumors. Journal of Endourology. 2005;19(4):480–483. doi: 10.1089/end.2005.19.480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80.Bachmann A, Sulser T, Jayet C, et al. Retroperitoneoscopy-assisted cryoablation of renal tumors using multiple 1.5 mm ultrathin cryoprobes: a preliminary report. European Urology. 2005;47(4):474–479. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.12.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81.Wyler SF, Sulser T, Ruszat R, et al. Intermediate-term results of retroperitoneoscopy-assisted cryotherapy for small renal tumours using multiple ultrathin cryoprobes. European Urology. 2007;51(4):971–979. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82.Shingleton WB, Sewell PE., Jr Percutaneous renal tumor cryoablation with magnetic resonance imaging guidance. The Journal of Urology. 2001;165(3):773–776. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Shingleton WB, Sewell PE., Jr Percutaneous renal cryoablation of renal tumors in patients with von Hippel-Lindau disease. The Journal of Urology. 2002;167(3):1268–1270. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84.Shingleton WB, Sewell PE., Jr Cryoablation of renal tumours in patients with solitary kidneys. BJU International. 2003;92(3):237–239. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04322.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85.Silverman SG, Tuncali K, vanSonnenberg E, et al. Renal tumors: MR imaging-guided percutaneous cryotherapy—initial experience in 23 patients. Radiology. 2005;236(2):716–724. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2362041107. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86.Gupta A, Allaf ME, Kavoussi LR, et al. Computerized tomography guided percutaneous renal cryoablation with the patient under conscious sedation: initial clinical experience. The Journal of Urology. 2006;175(2):447–453. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00247-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87.Atwell TD, Farrell MA, Callstrom MR, et al. Percutaneous cryoablation of large renal masses: technical feasibility and short-term outcome. American Journal of Roentgenology. 2007;188(5):1195–1200. doi: 10.2214/AJR.06.1152. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88.Clarke DM, Baust JM, Van Buskirk RG, Baust JG. Chemo-cryo combination therapy: an adjunctive model for the treatment of prostate cancer. Cryobiology. 2001;42(4):274–285. doi: 10.1006/cryo.2001.2333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Clarke DM, Baust JM, Van Buskirk RG, Baust JG. Addition of anticancer agents enhances freezing-induced prostate cancer cell death: implications of mitochondrial involvement. Cryobiology. 2004;49(1):45–61. doi: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2004.05.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90.Clarke DM, Hollister WR, Baust JG, Van Buskirk RG. Cryosurgical modeling: sequence of freezing and cytotoxic agent application affects cell death. Molecular Urology. 1999;3(1):25–31. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91.Kenneson MAK, Rukstalis DB, Ahmed M, Boyer S. Novel adjuvants of cryotherapy to enhance direct and bystander killing of human prostate cancer cells (PC3). In: Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Mid-Atlantic Section of the American Urological Association (MAAUA '06); October 2006; Capitol Hill, Wash, USA. [Google Scholar]
- 92.Kaouk JH, Haber G-P, Goel RK, et al. Single-port laparoscopic surgery in urology: initial experience. Urology. 2008;71(1):3–6. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93.Goel RK, Kaouk JH. Single port access renal cryoablation (SPARC): a new approach. European Urology. 2008;53(6):1204–1209. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.03.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94.Luciani LG, Cestari R, Tallarigo C. Incidental renal cell carcinoma—age and stage characterization and clinical implications: study of 1092 patients (1982–1997) Urology. 2000;56(1):58–62. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(00)00534-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95.Fergany AF, Hafez KS, Novick AC. Long-term results of nephron sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: 10-year followup. The Journal of Urology. 2000;163(2):442–445. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96.Sorcini A, Libertino JA. Cryotherapy for small renal cell tumors: CON. Urology. 1999;53(6):1079–1081. doi: 10.1016/s0090-4295(99)00131-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97.Lin Y-C, Turna B, Frota R, et al. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic cryoablation for multiple ipsilateral renal tumors. European Urology. 2008;53(6):1210–1218. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2008.02.052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98.Rendon RA, Kachura JR, Sweet JM, et al. The uncertainty of radio frequency treatment of renal cell carcinoma: findings at immediate and delayed nephrectomy. The Journal of Urology. 2002;167(4):1587–1592. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99.Michaels MJ, Rhee HK, Mourtzinos AP, Summerhayes IC, Silverman ML, Libertino JA. Incomplete renal tumor destruction using radio frequency interstitial ablation. The Journal of Urology. 2002;168(6):2406–2410. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64155-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100.Matlaga BR, Zagoria RJ, Woodruff RD, Torti FM, Hall MC. Phase II trial of radio frequency ablation of renal cancer: evaluation of the kill zone. The Journal of Urology. 2002;168(6):2401–2405. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)64154-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101.Varkarakis IM, Allaf ME, Inagaki T, et al. Percutaneous radio frequency ablation of renal masses: results at a 2-year mean followup. The Journal of Urology. 2005;174(2):456–460. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000165655.91152.c5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102.Uzzo RG. Is CT-guided percutaneous radiofrequency ablation oncologically effective in patients with renal cell carcinoma? Nature Clinical Practice Urology. 2008;5(1):18–19. doi: 10.1038/ncpuro0975. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103.Weight CJ, Kaouk JH, Hegarty NJ, et al. Correlation of radiographic imaging and histopathology following cryoablation and radio frequency ablation for renal tumors. The Journal of Urology. 2008;179(4):1277–1283. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104.Kunkle DA, Egleston BL, Uzzo RG. Excise, ablate or observe: the small renal mass dilemma—a meta-analysis and review. The Journal of Urology. 2008;179(4):1227–1234. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105.Gill IS, Remer EM, Hasan WA, et al. Renal cryoablation: outcome at 3 years. The Journal of Urology. 2005;173(6):1903–1907. doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000158154.28845.c9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106.Hafez KS, Fergany AF, Novick AC. Nephron sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: impact of tumor size on patient survival, tumor recurrence and TNM staging. The Journal of Urology. 1999;162(6):1930–1933. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)68071-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107.Aron M, Gill IS. Minimally invasive nephron-sparing surgery (MINSS) for renal tumours—part II: probe ablative therapy. European Urology. 2007;51(2):348–357. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.10.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]