English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background Percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) are two modalities indicated for early-stage renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with low extent of invasion. Purpose To compare the long-term results of percutaneous MWA and LPN in the treatment of cT1a RCC. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included 1955 patients with cT1a RCC treated with percutaneous MWA or LPN between April 2006 and November 2017. Propensity score matching was used. Oncologic outcomes were analyzed by using the Fine-and-Gray competing risk models. Results A total of 185 patients underwent percutaneous MWA (mean age, 63.2 years ± 15.2 [standard deviation]) and 1770 underwent LPN (mean age, 50.9 years ± 13.2). During the follow-up (median, 40.6 months), after propensity score matching, no difference was observed between local tumor progression (3.2% vs 0.5%, P = .10), cancer-specific survival (2.2% vs 3.8%, P = .24), and distant metastases (4.3% vs 4.3%, P = .76). Patients who underwent percutaneous MWA had worse overall survival (hazard ratio, 2.4; 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 5.7; P = .049 vs LPN) and disease-free survival (82.9% vs 91.4%, P = .003). Percutaneous MWA led to smaller drop in estimated glomerular filtration rate at discharge (6.2% vs 16.4%, P &lt; .001), smaller estimated blood loss (4.5 mL ± 1.3 vs 54.2 mL ± 69.2), lower cost ($3150 ± 2970 vs $6045 ± 1860 U.S. dollars), shorter operative time (0.5 minute ± 0.1 vs 1.8 minutes ± 0.6), and shorter postoperative hospitalization time (5.1 days ± 2.6 vs 6.9 days ± 2.8) (all P &lt; .001 vs LPN). There were fewer cases of fever in the percutaneous MWA group (16.2% vs 73.0%, P &lt; .001). Conclusion There were no significant differences regarding oncologic outcomes and complications between percutaneous microwave ablation and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for patients with cT1a renal cell carcinoma. Percutaneous microwave ablation led to smaller renal function change and lower blood loss. For patients who cannot be subjected to the risks of more invasive laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, percutaneous microwave ablation could be an alternative less invasive treatment option. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

radiology

Percutaneous Microwave Ablation versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy for cT1a Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity-matched Cohort Study of 1955 Patients