Percutaneous Microwave Ablation versus Cryoablation for Small Renal Masses (≤4 cm): 12-Year Experience at a Single Center

Abstract

PurposeTo determine whether microwave ablation (MWA) has equivalent outcomes to those of cryoablation (CA) in terms of technical success, adverse events, local tumor recurrence, and survival in adult patients with solid enhancing renal masses ≤4 cm. Materials and MethodsA retrospective review was performed of 279 small renal masses (≤4 cm) in 257 patients (median age, 71 years; range, 40–92 years) treated with either CA (n = 191) or MWA (n = 88) between January 2008 and December 2020 at a single high-volume institution. Evaluations of adverse events, treatment effectiveness, and therapeutic outcomes were conducted for both MWA and CA. Disease-free, metastatic-free, and cancer-specific survival rates were tabulated. The estimated glomerular filtration rate was employed to examine treatment-related alterations in renal function. ResultsNo difference in patient age (P = .99) or sex (P = .06) was observed between the MWA and CA groups. Cryoablated lesions were larger (P < .01) and of greater complexity (P = .03). The technical success rate for MWA was 100%, whereas 1 of 191 cryoablated lesions required retreatment for residual tumor. There was no impact on renal function after CA (P = .76) or MWA (P = .49). Secondary analysis using propensity score matching demonstrated no significant differences in local recurrence rates (P = .39), adverse event rates (P = .20), cancer-free survival (P = .76), or overall survival (P = .19) when comparing matched cohorts of patients who underwent MWA and CA. ConclusionsHigh technical success and local disease control were achieved for both MWA and CA. Cancer-specific survival was equivalent. Higher adverse event rates after CA may reflect the tendency to treat larger, more complex lesions with CA.