Search

Introduction: Renal ablation is a recognized treatment modality for small renal masses. Cone-beam CT (CBCT) has been recently used in interventional oncology as a promising new guidance device, but this technology still needs to be validated for renal ablations. We aimed to assess the technical success of CBCT applications in renal ablative treatments., Materials and Methods: Between March 2016 and June 2018, 14 patients (mean age 69, range 54-83, 7F, 7M) underwent 21 renal ablations for histologically proven renal cell carcinoma (RCC). All treatments were performed with ultrasound (US) and CBCT guidance under general anesthesia in a dedicated angiography room setting. CBCT was mainly used to assess needle placement and to exclude complications at the end of the procedure. In two small lesions (< 1 cm), pre-acquired CBCT was co-registered with real-time US to obtain a US-CBCT fusion image guidance for tumor ablation., Results: Whether used alone or in combination with other imaging modalities, CBCT was proven to be technically successful in all 21 procedures to guide or assist tumor ablation. A primary technical efficacy of thermal ablation was achieved in 19/21 ablations (90.1%) at 1 month. Mean procedure duration was 100.2 min (range 160-64). Mean length of hospital stay was 2 days (range 1-10 days). All patients are still under active surveillance for a mean follow-up of 14.5 months (range 4-26 months)., Conclusions: CBCT for renal ablation guidance is a viable tool. Larger series are needed to compare it to MDCT.

Percutaneous ablation is an increasingly applied technique for the treatment of localized renal tumors, especially for elderly or co-morbid patients, where co-morbidities increase the risk of traditional nephrectomy. Ablative techniques are technically suited for the treatment of tumors generally not exceeding 4 cm, which has been set as general consensus cutoff and is described as the upper threshold of T1a kidney tumors. This threshold cutoff is being challenged, but with still limited evidence. Percutaneous ablation techniques for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) include radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation, laser or microwave ablation; the main advantage of all these techniques over surgery is less invasiveness, lower complication rates and better patient tolerability. Currently, international guidelines recommend percutaneous ablation either as intervention for frail patients or as a first line tool, provided that the tumor can be radically ablated. The purpose of this article is to describe the basic concepts of percutaneous ablation in the treatment of RCC. Controversies concerning techniques and products and the need for patient-centered tailored approaches during selection among the different techniques available will be discussed.

Objective: To review the efficacy of percutaneous thermal ablation (TA) of bone metastases (radiofrequency ablation [RFA], microwave ablation [MWA], cryoablation [CA], and MR-guided focused ultrasound [MRgFUS]) in reducing pain in patients with advanced stage cancer., Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, MEDLINE In-Process, BIDS ISI, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane database using the keywords "ablation," "painful," "bone," and "metastases" combined in multiple algorithms. Inclusion criteria were: original clinical studies published between 2001 and 2018; performance of RFA, MWA, CA or MRgFUS; and quantitative pain assessment before/after TA of bone metastasis., Results: Eleven papers (3 on RFA, 1 on MWA, 2 on CA, and 5 on MRgFUS) involving 364 patients were reviewed. A technical success rate of 96-100% was reported, with follow-up for up to 6 months. At baseline, pain scores ranged from 5.4 to 8, at 1-4 weeks from 0.5 to 5, and at 12 weeks from 0.3 to 4.5. Mean pain reduction compared with baseline ranged from 26 to 91% at 4 weeks and from 16% to 95% at 12 weeks. MWA treatments caused no complications, whereas MRgFUS showed the highest complication rate. The number of minor complications observed ranged from 0 to 59 (complication ratio 0-1.17), whereas the number of significant adverse effects ranged from 0 to 4 (complication ratio 0-0.04)., Conclusion: All techniques achieved pain relief after 1 and 3 months, in up to 91% and 95% of patients respectively. MWA showed a negligible complication rate, whereas MRgFUS is associated with a noteworthy rate of adverse events. Future studies should adopt a standardized pain reporting scale to allow for meta-analysis.