Objective To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and adaptability of cryoablation (CA) as a minimally invasive treatment for renal tumors, particularly in high-risk patients managed in a small healthcare center. Cryoablation is a minimally invasive therapeutic technique used to treat tumors in various organs, including the lung, kidney, liver, breast, bone, and pancreas, as well as metastases. It employs extremely low temperatures to destroy tumor tissue, with potential systemic effects due to the release of tumor antigens. The procedure, guided by advanced imaging, involves positioning cryoprobes to create a targeted “ice ball” around the tumor. Methods Between January 2023 and October 2024, six patients with renal tumors were treated with cryoablation at the Interventional Radiology Division of Moscati Hospital, Avellino, Italy. Cases included patients with advanced age, significant comorbidities, or contraindications to surgery. Tumor sizes ranged from 16 to 34 mm, involving both exophytic and central lesions. Cryoablation was performed under CT or CBCT guidance, using advanced techniques such as hydrodissection and tailored cryoprobes to ensure safe and precise ablation. Clinical outcomes and recurrence rates were assessed over a follow-up period of 6–15 months (mean 12.33 ± 3.50 months). Results Cryoablation achieved a 100% technical success rate with no major complications. Imaging follow-up confirmed complete tumor ablation in all cases, with no evidence of recurrence. The technique demonstrated versatility in managing various clinical scenarios, including an atrophic native kidney in a kidney transplant patient, obesity, and lesions near critical structures. Patients experienced minimal recovery times and were discharged shortly after the procedure. Conclusion Cryoablation is a safe and effective nephron-sparing technique for small renal masses, offering excellent oncological control and rapid recovery, even in high-risk patients. Its minimally invasive nature and adaptability underscore its value as a cornerstone of modern oncology care, particularly in small healthcare centers. Further research is warranted to evaluate long-term outcomes and expand its application in broader clinical contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Porcaro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: