Urology
Volume 75, Issue 2 , Pages 307-310 , February 2010

Tumor Size and Endophytic Growth Pattern Affect Recurrence Rates After Laparoscopic Renal Cryoablation

  • Matvey Tsivian

      Affiliations

    • Duke University Medical Center, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham, North Carolina
    • ,
  • John C. Lyne

      Affiliations

    • Allegheny General Hospital, Department of Urology, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    • ,
  • Janice M. Mayes

      Affiliations

    • Duke University Medical Center, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham, North Carolina
    • ,
  • Vladimir Mouraviev

      Affiliations

    • Duke University Medical Center, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham, North Carolina
    • ,
  • Masaki Kimura

      Affiliations

    • Duke University Medical Center, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham, North Carolina
    • ,
  • Thomas J. Polascik

      Affiliations

    • Duke University Medical Center, Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Durham, North Carolina
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Thomas J. Polascik, M.D., Duke University Medical Center, Box 2804, Yellow Zone, Durham, NC 27710

Received 15 June 2009 ,Accepted 16 September 2009.

References 

  1. Jayson M, Sanders H. Increased incidence of serendipitously discovered renal cell carcinoma. Urology. 1998;51:203–205
  2. Smith SJ, Bosniak MA, Megibow AJ, et al. Renal cell carcinoma: earlier discovery and increased detection. Radiology. 1989;170:699–703
  3. Fergany AF, Hafez KS, Novick AC. Long-term results of nephron sparing surgery for localized renal cell carcinoma: 10-year followup. J Urol. 2000;163:442–445
  4. Mouraviev V, Joniau S, Van Poppel H, et al. Current status of minimally invasive ablative techniques in the treatment of small renal tumours. Eur Urol. 2007;51:328–336
  5. Polascik TJ, Nosnik I, Mayes JM, et al. Short term clinical outcome after laparoscopic cryoablation of the renal tumor < or = 3.5 cm. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2007;6:621–624
  6. Weld KJ, Figenshau RS, Venkatesh R, et al. Laparoscopic cryoablation for small renal masses: three-year follow-up. Urology. 2007;69:448–451
  7. Venkatesh R, Weld K, Ames CD, et al. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal masses: effect of tumor location. Urology. 2006;67:1169–1174[discussion:1174]
  8. Matin SF, Ahrar K, Cadeddu JA, et al. Residual and recurrent disease following renal energy ablative therapy: a multi-institutional study. J Urol. 2006;176:1973–1977
  9. Stein AJ, Mayes JM, Mouraviev V, et al. Persistent contrast enhancement several months after laparoscopic cryoablation of the small renal mass may not indicate recurrent tumor. J Endourol. 2008;22:2433–2439
  10. Wright AD, Turk TM, Nagar MS, et al. Endophytic lesions: a predictor of failure in laparoscopic renal cryoablation. J Endourol. 2007;21:1493–1496
  11. Nisbet AA, Rieder JM, Tran VQ, et al. Decision tree for laparoscopic partial nephrectomy versus laparoscopic renal cryoablation for small renal masses. J Endourol. 2009;23:431–437
  12. Lehman DS, Hruby GW, Phillips CK, et al. First Prize (tie): laparoscopic renal cryoablation: efficacy and complications for larger renal masses. J Endourol. 2008;22:1123–1127
  13. Breda A, Lam JS, Riggs S, et al. In vivo efficacy of laparoscopic assisted percutaneous renal cryotherapy: evidence based guidelines for the practicing urologist. J Urol. 2008;179:333–337
  14. Novick AC, Campbell SC, Belldegrun A, et al. Guideline for Management of the Clinical Stage 1 Renal Mass. Linthicum, MD: American Urological Association; 2009;

PII: S0090-4295(09)02629-6

doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.09.039

Urology
Volume 75, Issue 2 , Pages 307-310 , February 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution