Percutaneous renal cryoablation (PERC) for select tumors is comparable to laparoscopic renal cryoablation (LAP) with respect to short-term outcomes and complications, data suggest. PERC, however, may offer advantages in terms of hospital stay, narcotic requirements, and pulmonary complications.
Ithaar H. Derweesh, MD, of the University of Tennessee Health Science Center in Memphis, and his colleagues compared 13 LAP-treated patients with 21 PERC-treated patients. The mean tumor size in the LAP and PERC groups was similar: 2.9 and 3.4 cm, respectively.
LAP took longer to perform than PERC (mean 169.4 vs. 112.4 minutes). The mean hospital stay was 60.5 hours for the LAP group compared with 45.4 hours in the PERC group. In addition, 84.6% of the LAP-treated patients required narcotics postoperatively compared with only 19% of the PERC patients.
Postoperative atelectasis occurred in 61.5% of the LAP group versus 23.8% of the PERC patients. One year after surgery, residual tumor was present in 7.7% and 4.8% of the LAP and PERC groups, a non-significant difference between groups.