Keywords:
Kidney, Interventional non-vascular, Oncology, CT, Ablation procedures, Outcomes analysis, Technical aspects, Neoplasia, Outcomes
Authors:
A. Rudel, J. HAVET, X. Carle, J. BAQUE, P. Chevallier; Nice/FR
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2018/C-1909
References
1.Campbell,
S.
C.
et al. Guideline for Management of the Clinical T1 Renal Mass.
J.
Urol. 182, 1271–1279 (2009).
2.Lightfoot,
N.
et al. Impact of Noninvasive Imaging on Increased Incidental Detection of Renal Cell Carcinoma.
Eur.
Urol. 37, 521–527 (2000).
3.McClure,
T.
D.
et al. Intermediate Outcomes and Predictors of Efficacy in the Radiofrequency Ablation of 100 Pathologically Proven Renal Cell Carcinomas.
J.
Vasc.
Interv.
Radiol. 25, 1682–1688 (2014).
4.Schmit,
G.
D.
et al. ABLATE: a renal ablation planning algorithm.
AJR Am.
J.
Roentgenol. 202, 894–903 (2014).
5.Mansilla,
A.
V.
et al. CT–Guided Microwave Ablation of 45 Renal Tumors: Analysis of Procedure Complexity Utilizing a Percutaneous Renal Ablation Complexity Scoring System.
J.
Vasc.
Interv.
Radiol. 28, 222–229 (2017).
6.Cantwell,
C.
P.
et al. Protecting the Ureter during Radiofrequency Ablation of Renal Cell Cancer: A Pilot Study of Retrograde Pyeloperfusion with Cooled Dextrose 5% in Water.
J.
Vasc.
Interv.
Radiol. 19, 1034–1040 (2008).
7.Higgins,
L.
J.
& Hong,
K.
Renal Ablation Techniques: State of the Art.
Am.
J.
Roentgenol. 205, 735–741 (2015).
8.Pantelidou,
M.
et al. Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Robotic-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy for the Treatment of Small Renal Cell Carcinoma.
Cardiovasc.
Intervent.
Radiol. 39, 1595–1603 (2016).