Role of Cryoablation for the Treatment of cT1b Kidney Lesions: Outcomes of a Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionThe American Urological Association (AUA) and the European Association of Urology (EAU) currently recommend partial nephrectomy (PN) over ablation for cT1b lesions. However, recent series have shown comparable outcomes for cryoablation (CA) when compared to PN, making it an appealing alternative for a select group of patients. The objective of this manuscript is to assess treatment outcomes and complications of CA for cT1b lesions.MethodsUsing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive search was done on MEDLINE and Cochrane Library electronic databases identifying studies that reported on outcomes and complications of CA for kidney tumors. Inclusion criteria included cT1b lesions between 4 cm and 7 cm, excluding treatment of other sizes.ResultsA total of 347 patients with cT1b lesions identified on imaging underwent percutaneous or laparoscopic CA. The average age was > 65 years, the median size of lesions and RENAL score ranged between 4.3–4.8 cm and 8–9, respectively. The majority of patients had a Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) of 2, and median follow-up ranged between 13 months and 95 months. Across all the series, primary and secondary success rates were between 84%–98% and 92%–98%, respectively. The local recurrence ranged from 2.8% to 27%. For patients with documented RCC on biopsy, the 5-year overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS) ranged from 56%–91%, 85%–100%, 70%–96.4%, and 90%–96%, respectively. The major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo III-V) was low, at 6.2%.ConclusionWith promising survival outcomes and low complication rates perioperatively, CA is acceptable in a select group of patients with T1b renal tumors, including those who are older, have multiple comorbidities, or have relative or absolute contraindication to surgery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".