Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40123723›Full record

ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2024

Percutaneous cryoablation of kidney tumors after partial nephrectomy.

Wojciech Krajewski, Maciej Guziński, Wojciech Tomczak, Łukasz Nowak, Jan Łaszkiewicz, Joanna Chorbińska, Adam Chełmoński, Katarzyna Grunwald, Bartosz Małkiewicz, Tomasz Szydełko

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Wojciech KrajewskiDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Maciej GuzińskiDepartment of General Radiology, Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Wojciech TomczakUniversity Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Łukasz NowakDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Jan ŁaszkiewiczDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Joanna ChorbińskaDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Adam ChełmońskiDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Katarzyna GrunwaldDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Bartosz MałkiewiczDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.
Tomasz SzydełkoDepartment of Minimally Invasive and Robotic Urology, University Centre of Excellence in Urology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe widespread use of ultrasound and cross‑sectional imaging has led to a steady increase in the incidental discovery of renal masses. Most of them are treated with partial nephrectomy (PN), as recommended by the European Association of Urology guidelines. However, this approach carries a risk of local recurrence. In such a case, surgical reintervention can be more challenging and is often associated with worse prognosis. In this context, percutaneous ablative therapies are a promising alternative.

aimThis study presents our experience with using percutaneous cryoablation (PCA) to manage recurrences and new masses in previously operated kidneys. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a retrospective data analysis to evaluate patients treated with PCA for tumor recurrence or residual disease in the postresection bed, excluding those with de novo or recurrent tumors in the contralateral kidney.

resultsA total of 23 individuals met the inclusion criteria. Of those, 14 initially underwent laparoscopic PN, and 9 were treated with open surgery. The median interval from the initial surgery to recurrence‑targeted PCA was 23 months (range, 7-228). The mean (SD) RENAL score on admission was 7.5 (1.9), and the median (interquartile range) tumor volume was 3 (1.6-4.5) ml. The median length of hospital stay was 23 hours (range, 6-55). There was no significant change in estimated glomerular filtration rate following cryoablation. All the recorded complications, except one, were grade I and resolved with hydration or treatment with nonsteroidal anti‑inflammatory drugs. No patient required dialysis in the perioperative period.

conclusionsImaging‑guided PCA is a feasible and effective treatment option for patients with renal tumor recurrences after PN.

Indexed as

ablative therapypercutaneous cryoablationrecurrencerenal cell carcinomarenal cryoablation

Identifiers

PMID40123723
PMCPMC11927780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.