We have located links that may give you full text access.
Percutaneous Microwave Ablation Versus Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for Stage I Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study Focusing Upon Long-Term Follow-Up of Oncologic Outcomes.
Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology 2024 April 2
PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare long-term oncologic outcomes of percutaneous computed tomography-guided microwave ablation (MWA) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for the treatment of stage 1 (T1a and T1b) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional database research identified all T1 RCC patients who underwent either MWA or RAPN. Models were adjusted with propensity score matching. Kaplan-Meier log-rank test analyses and Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to compare the oncologic outcomes. Patient and tumor characteristics, technical success as well as oncologic outcomes were evaluated and compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: After propensity score matching, a total of 71 patients underwent percutaneous MWA (mean age 70 ± 10 years) and 71 underwent RAPN (mean age 60 ± 9 years). At 8-year follow-up, the estimated survival rates for MWA cohort were 98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95-100%) for overall survival, 97% (95% CI 93-100%) for recurrence-free survival, and 97% (95% CI 93-100%) for metastasis-free survival. The matched cohort that underwent RAPN exhibited survival rates of 100% (95% CI 100-100%) for overall survival, 98% (95% CI 94-100%) for recurrence-free survival, and 98% (95% CI 94-100%) for metastasis-free survival. After performing log-rank testing, these rates were not significantly different (p values of 0.44, 0.67, and 0.67, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The results of the present study suggest that both MWA and RAPN are equally effective in terms of oncologic outcome for the treatment of T1 RCC.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional database research identified all T1 RCC patients who underwent either MWA or RAPN. Models were adjusted with propensity score matching. Kaplan-Meier log-rank test analyses and Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to compare the oncologic outcomes. Patient and tumor characteristics, technical success as well as oncologic outcomes were evaluated and compared between the 2 groups.
RESULTS: After propensity score matching, a total of 71 patients underwent percutaneous MWA (mean age 70 ± 10 years) and 71 underwent RAPN (mean age 60 ± 9 years). At 8-year follow-up, the estimated survival rates for MWA cohort were 98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95-100%) for overall survival, 97% (95% CI 93-100%) for recurrence-free survival, and 97% (95% CI 93-100%) for metastasis-free survival. The matched cohort that underwent RAPN exhibited survival rates of 100% (95% CI 100-100%) for overall survival, 98% (95% CI 94-100%) for recurrence-free survival, and 98% (95% CI 94-100%) for metastasis-free survival. After performing log-rank testing, these rates were not significantly different (p values of 0.44, 0.67, and 0.67, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The results of the present study suggest that both MWA and RAPN are equally effective in terms of oncologic outcome for the treatment of T1 RCC.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
Management of Diverticulitis: A Review.JAMA Surgery 2024 April 18
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app