Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous renal cryoablation with conscious sedation

To investigate complications and treatment failure rates of percutaneous renal cryoablation (PRC) for small renal masses under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (LACS), to assess the safety and effectiveness of this approach, as PRC is typically performed under general anaesthesia (GA). We re...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Arab Journal of Urology 2020-07, Vol.18 (3), p.163-168
Hauptverfasser: Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar, Francois, Sean, Bhamber, Tiagpaul, Evans, Holt, Gaston, Kris, Riggs, Stephen B, Teigland, Chris, Clark, Peter E, Roy, Ornob P
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 168
container_issue 3
container_start_page 163
container_title Arab Journal of Urology
container_volume 18
creator Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar
Francois, Sean
Bhamber, Tiagpaul
Evans, Holt
Gaston, Kris
Riggs, Stephen B
Teigland, Chris
Clark, Peter E
Roy, Ornob P
description To investigate complications and treatment failure rates of percutaneous renal cryoablation (PRC) for small renal masses under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (LACS), to assess the safety and effectiveness of this approach, as PRC is typically performed under general anaesthesia (GA). We retrospectively reviewed PRC under LACS from 2003 to 2017. We analysed perioperative parameters between patients who successfully underwent PRC under LACS and patients with post-procedural complications or treatment failure (renal mass enhancement after successful intraoperative tumour ablation). Two-sided non-parametric and Fisher's exact tests were performed to compare uncomplicated or disease-free PRC with the complication or treatment failure group, respectively. A total of 100 PRCs under LACS were performed during the study period. Of these patients, six patients had at least one postoperative complication (6%), and treatment failure was diagnosed in nine patients (9%) after PRC [mean (SD) follow-up of 42.7 (26.6) months]. The procedural failure rate was 1%. No ablations were converted to GA. The mean tumour size was smaller in patients who had no complications during PRC compared to those who did, at a mean (SD) of 2.2 (0.6) cm vs 3.0 (1.0) cm ( = 0.039). The use of more intraoperative probes during the PRC was also associated with complications, at a mean (SD) 3.0 (1.4) vs 1.8 (0.8) ( = 0.021). PRC under LACS is an effective and safe procedural approach for managing small renal masses with low complication, treatment failure, and procedural failure rates. Larger renal masses and intraoperative use of multiple probes is associated with an increased risk of PRC complications. BMI: body mass index; CCI: Charlson Comorbidity Index; GA: general anaesthesia; LACS: local anaesthesia and conscious sedation; PRC: percutaneous renal cryoablation; R.E.N.A.L.: Radius, Exophytic/Endophytic, Nearness, Anterior/Posterior, Location.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1739382
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7473112</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>33029426</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-84b1197e4348373585cfe8092125700fd317ccca9e9e3dd3885fa7c9320ec6153</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkFtLAzEQhYMottT-BCV_oDWX3U3yIkjxBgUfquBbyGYnNrDdlGRb6b93116oTzOcM-cMfAjdUjKlRJJ7RhTJlfyaMsI6SXDFJbtAw16f9Mbl2T5A45R8SbJMcEJkcY0GnBOmMlYM0WJhHLQ7bJoKg3NgW7-FBlLCweE1RLtpTQNhk3CExtTYxl0wZW1aHxr849sltqFJ1vcXCao__QZdOVMnGB_mCH0-P33MXifz95e32eN8YrNCthOZlZQqARnPJBc8l7l1IIlilOWCEFdxKqy1RoECXlVcytwZYRVnBGxBcz5CD_ve9aZcQWWhaaOp9Tr6lYk7HYzX_53GL_V32GrRkaCUdQX5vsDGkFIEd8pSonvQ-gha96D1AXSXuzt_fEodsfJfYAF7uA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous renal cryoablation with conscious sedation</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Open Access</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar ; Francois, Sean ; Bhamber, Tiagpaul ; Evans, Holt ; Gaston, Kris ; Riggs, Stephen B ; Teigland, Chris ; Clark, Peter E ; Roy, Ornob P</creator><creatorcontrib>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar ; Francois, Sean ; Bhamber, Tiagpaul ; Evans, Holt ; Gaston, Kris ; Riggs, Stephen B ; Teigland, Chris ; Clark, Peter E ; Roy, Ornob P</creatorcontrib><description>To investigate complications and treatment failure rates of percutaneous renal cryoablation (PRC) for small renal masses under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (LACS), to assess the safety and effectiveness of this approach, as PRC is typically performed under general anaesthesia (GA). We retrospectively reviewed PRC under LACS from 2003 to 2017. We analysed perioperative parameters between patients who successfully underwent PRC under LACS and patients with post-procedural complications or treatment failure (renal mass enhancement after successful intraoperative tumour ablation). Two-sided non-parametric and Fisher's exact tests were performed to compare uncomplicated or disease-free PRC with the complication or treatment failure group, respectively. A total of 100 PRCs under LACS were performed during the study period. Of these patients, six patients had at least one postoperative complication (6%), and treatment failure was diagnosed in nine patients (9%) after PRC [mean (SD) follow-up of 42.7 (26.6) months]. The procedural failure rate was 1%. No ablations were converted to GA. The mean tumour size was smaller in patients who had no complications during PRC compared to those who did, at a mean (SD) of 2.2 (0.6) cm vs 3.0 (1.0) cm ( = 0.039). The use of more intraoperative probes during the PRC was also associated with complications, at a mean (SD) 3.0 (1.4) vs 1.8 (0.8) ( = 0.021). PRC under LACS is an effective and safe procedural approach for managing small renal masses with low complication, treatment failure, and procedural failure rates. Larger renal masses and intraoperative use of multiple probes is associated with an increased risk of PRC complications. BMI: body mass index; CCI: Charlson Comorbidity Index; GA: general anaesthesia; LACS: local anaesthesia and conscious sedation; PRC: percutaneous renal cryoablation; R.E.N.A.L.: Radius, Exophytic/Endophytic, Nearness, Anterior/Posterior, Location.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2090-598X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2090-598X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2090-5998</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2020.1739382</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33029426</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Taylor &amp; Francis</publisher><subject>Oncology/ Reconstruction</subject><ispartof>Arab Journal of Urology, 2020-07, Vol.18 (3), p.163-168</ispartof><rights>2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group.</rights><rights>2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor &amp; Francis Group. 2020 The Author(s)</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-84b1197e4348373585cfe8092125700fd317ccca9e9e3dd3885fa7c9320ec6153</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-84b1197e4348373585cfe8092125700fd317ccca9e9e3dd3885fa7c9320ec6153</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7183-1272</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7473112/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7473112/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33029426$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Francois, Sean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhamber, Tiagpaul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, Holt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaston, Kris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riggs, Stephen B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teigland, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, Peter E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roy, Ornob P</creatorcontrib><title>Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous renal cryoablation with conscious sedation</title><title>Arab Journal of Urology</title><addtitle>Arab J Urol</addtitle><description>To investigate complications and treatment failure rates of percutaneous renal cryoablation (PRC) for small renal masses under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (LACS), to assess the safety and effectiveness of this approach, as PRC is typically performed under general anaesthesia (GA). We retrospectively reviewed PRC under LACS from 2003 to 2017. We analysed perioperative parameters between patients who successfully underwent PRC under LACS and patients with post-procedural complications or treatment failure (renal mass enhancement after successful intraoperative tumour ablation). Two-sided non-parametric and Fisher's exact tests were performed to compare uncomplicated or disease-free PRC with the complication or treatment failure group, respectively. A total of 100 PRCs under LACS were performed during the study period. Of these patients, six patients had at least one postoperative complication (6%), and treatment failure was diagnosed in nine patients (9%) after PRC [mean (SD) follow-up of 42.7 (26.6) months]. The procedural failure rate was 1%. No ablations were converted to GA. The mean tumour size was smaller in patients who had no complications during PRC compared to those who did, at a mean (SD) of 2.2 (0.6) cm vs 3.0 (1.0) cm ( = 0.039). The use of more intraoperative probes during the PRC was also associated with complications, at a mean (SD) 3.0 (1.4) vs 1.8 (0.8) ( = 0.021). PRC under LACS is an effective and safe procedural approach for managing small renal masses with low complication, treatment failure, and procedural failure rates. Larger renal masses and intraoperative use of multiple probes is associated with an increased risk of PRC complications. BMI: body mass index; CCI: Charlson Comorbidity Index; GA: general anaesthesia; LACS: local anaesthesia and conscious sedation; PRC: percutaneous renal cryoablation; R.E.N.A.L.: Radius, Exophytic/Endophytic, Nearness, Anterior/Posterior, Location.</description><subject>Oncology/ Reconstruction</subject><issn>2090-598X</issn><issn>2090-598X</issn><issn>2090-5998</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpVkFtLAzEQhYMottT-BCV_oDWX3U3yIkjxBgUfquBbyGYnNrDdlGRb6b93116oTzOcM-cMfAjdUjKlRJJ7RhTJlfyaMsI6SXDFJbtAw16f9Mbl2T5A45R8SbJMcEJkcY0GnBOmMlYM0WJhHLQ7bJoKg3NgW7-FBlLCweE1RLtpTQNhk3CExtTYxl0wZW1aHxr849sltqFJ1vcXCao__QZdOVMnGB_mCH0-P33MXifz95e32eN8YrNCthOZlZQqARnPJBc8l7l1IIlilOWCEFdxKqy1RoECXlVcytwZYRVnBGxBcz5CD_ve9aZcQWWhaaOp9Tr6lYk7HYzX_53GL_V32GrRkaCUdQX5vsDGkFIEd8pSonvQ-gha96D1AXSXuzt_fEodsfJfYAF7uA</recordid><startdate>20200702</startdate><enddate>20200702</enddate><creator>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar</creator><creator>Francois, Sean</creator><creator>Bhamber, Tiagpaul</creator><creator>Evans, Holt</creator><creator>Gaston, Kris</creator><creator>Riggs, Stephen B</creator><creator>Teigland, Chris</creator><creator>Clark, Peter E</creator><creator>Roy, Ornob P</creator><general>Taylor &amp; Francis</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7183-1272</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200702</creationdate><title>Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous renal cryoablation with conscious sedation</title><author>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar ; Francois, Sean ; Bhamber, Tiagpaul ; Evans, Holt ; Gaston, Kris ; Riggs, Stephen B ; Teigland, Chris ; Clark, Peter E ; Roy, Ornob P</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-84b1197e4348373585cfe8092125700fd317ccca9e9e3dd3885fa7c9320ec6153</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Oncology/ Reconstruction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Francois, Sean</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhamber, Tiagpaul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Evans, Holt</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaston, Kris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Riggs, Stephen B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teigland, Chris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clark, Peter E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roy, Ornob P</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Arab Journal of Urology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Patel, Sagar Rohitkumar</au><au>Francois, Sean</au><au>Bhamber, Tiagpaul</au><au>Evans, Holt</au><au>Gaston, Kris</au><au>Riggs, Stephen B</au><au>Teigland, Chris</au><au>Clark, Peter E</au><au>Roy, Ornob P</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous renal cryoablation with conscious sedation</atitle><jtitle>Arab Journal of Urology</jtitle><addtitle>Arab J Urol</addtitle><date>2020-07-02</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>163</spage><epage>168</epage><pages>163-168</pages><issn>2090-598X</issn><eissn>2090-598X</eissn><eissn>2090-5998</eissn><abstract>To investigate complications and treatment failure rates of percutaneous renal cryoablation (PRC) for small renal masses under local anaesthesia and conscious sedation (LACS), to assess the safety and effectiveness of this approach, as PRC is typically performed under general anaesthesia (GA). We retrospectively reviewed PRC under LACS from 2003 to 2017. We analysed perioperative parameters between patients who successfully underwent PRC under LACS and patients with post-procedural complications or treatment failure (renal mass enhancement after successful intraoperative tumour ablation). Two-sided non-parametric and Fisher's exact tests were performed to compare uncomplicated or disease-free PRC with the complication or treatment failure group, respectively. A total of 100 PRCs under LACS were performed during the study period. Of these patients, six patients had at least one postoperative complication (6%), and treatment failure was diagnosed in nine patients (9%) after PRC [mean (SD) follow-up of 42.7 (26.6) months]. The procedural failure rate was 1%. No ablations were converted to GA. The mean tumour size was smaller in patients who had no complications during PRC compared to those who did, at a mean (SD) of 2.2 (0.6) cm vs 3.0 (1.0) cm ( = 0.039). The use of more intraoperative probes during the PRC was also associated with complications, at a mean (SD) 3.0 (1.4) vs 1.8 (0.8) ( = 0.021). PRC under LACS is an effective and safe procedural approach for managing small renal masses with low complication, treatment failure, and procedural failure rates. Larger renal masses and intraoperative use of multiple probes is associated with an increased risk of PRC complications. BMI: body mass index; CCI: Charlson Comorbidity Index; GA: general anaesthesia; LACS: local anaesthesia and conscious sedation; PRC: percutaneous renal cryoablation; R.E.N.A.L.: Radius, Exophytic/Endophytic, Nearness, Anterior/Posterior, Location.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Taylor &amp; Francis</pub><pmid>33029426</pmid><doi>10.1080/2090598X.2020.1739382</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7183-1272</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2090-598X
ispartof Arab Journal of Urology, 2020-07, Vol.18 (3), p.163-168
issn 2090-598X
2090-598X
2090-5998
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7473112
source Taylor & Francis Open Access; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central
subjects Oncology/ Reconstruction
title Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous renal cryoablation with conscious sedation
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T00%3A55%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Safety%20and%20effectiveness%20of%20percutaneous%20renal%20cryoablation%20with%20conscious%20sedation&rft.jtitle=Arab%20Journal%20of%20Urology&rft.au=Patel,%20Sagar%20Rohitkumar&rft.date=2020-07-02&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=163&rft.epage=168&rft.pages=163-168&rft.issn=2090-598X&rft.eissn=2090-598X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/2090598X.2020.1739382&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_cross%3E33029426%3C/pubmed_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/33029426&rfr_iscdi=true