Effectiveness of Ultrasound-Guided Radiofrequency Ablation in the Treatment of 36 Renal Cell Carcinoma Tumours Compared with Published Results of Using Computed Tomography Guidance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to analyse the outcomes of ultrasound (US) guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with renal lesions and to compare our outcomes with published results of ablations carried out when using computed tomography (CT) guidance. This retrospective study evaluated RFA of 36 renal tumours in 32 patients (M = 21, F = 11). The mean patient age was 70 years (range, 39-89 years). Ablations were performed by using either multi-tined applicators or cooled and/or cluster applicators under US guidance. Applicator size varied from 2-5 cm, depending on the size of the index tumour. Conscious sedation was administered by an anesthetist. Follow-up imaging by using contrast-enhanced CT was performed 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after RFA, and yearly thereafter. The mean tumour follow-up time was 12 months (range, 1-35 months). The mean tumour size was 2.7 cm (range, 1-5 cm). Primary effectiveness was achieved in 31 cases (86.1%), with patients in 5 cases (11.1%) demonstrating residual disease. Three patients had repeated sessions, which were technically successful. The remaining 2 patients were not re-treated because of patient comorbidities. As a result, secondary effectiveness was achieved in 34 patients (94.4%). In 1 patient, a new lesion developed in the same kidney but remote from the 2 prior areas of treatment. Hydrodissection was performed in 3 patients (8.3%), manipulation or electrode repositioning in 11 patients (30.6%), and ureteric cooling in 1 patient (2.8%). Minor and major complications occurred in 3 (8.3%) and 3 (8.3%) patients, respectively. Correlation coefficients were calculated for distance from skin to tumour and risk of complication as well as compared with primary and secondary effectiveness. This study demonstrates that US-guided RFA is an effective treatment for renal lesions, with rates of effectiveness and complication rates comparable with published CT-guided RFA results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".