Laparoscopic vs Percutaneous Cryotherapy for Renal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cryoablation has emerged as an alternative to the more invasive partial nephrectomy for small renal masses. The approach can be carried out by two techniques, either laparoscopic cryoablation (LCA) or percutaneous cryoablation, (PCA) with CT guidance. We aimed to compare between the two procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, including studies comparing the two techniques. Outcomes included incomplete ablation, late local recurrence, cancer-specific survival, procedure time, transfusion rates, hospital stay, and complications.

RESULTS: A total of 1475 patients were included, 788 patients in the laparoscopic group and 687 patients in the percutaneous group. There was statistical difference favoring the laparoscopic group with regard to having less incomplete ablation (p = 0.0008) and higher cancer-specific survival patients (p = 0.04). However, there was longer hospital stays in the LCA group (p < 0.00001) and was found to be more costly than the PCA group. There was significantly more Clavien-I complications in the PCA group (p = 0.001) and more Clavien-III complications in the LCA group (p = 0.001). Otherwise, there were no differences in any other outcome parameter.

CONCLUSION: LCA was found to have less incomplete tumor ablation rates and higher cancer-specific survival rates, however, higher hospitalization time, more major complications (Clavien III), and was costlier compared with PCA.