CT-guided percutaneous cryoablation of central lung tumors

Colak, Errol; Tatlı, Servet; Shyn, Paul B.; Tuncalı, Kemal; Silverman, Stuart G.

doi:10.5152/dir.2014.13440

Cited by 31 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of note, patients in the CA group experienced significantly less intraprocedural pain compared with those in the MWA group. Several previous studies have reported CA to be less painful compared with other ablation techniques (43,55,56). Extreme cold acts as an anesthetic and may be the reason for less intraprocedural pain during CA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparing cryoablation and microwave ablation for the treatment of patients with stage�IIIB/IV non‑small cell lung cancer

Das

Huang²,

et al. 2019

Oncol Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to compare the safety and efficacy of cryoablation (CA) and microwave ablation (MWA) as treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC treated with CA (n=45) or MWA (n=56) were enrolled in the present study. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); the secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) time and adverse events (AEs). The median PFS times between the two groups were not significantly different (P=0.36): CA, 10 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5-12.4] vs. MWA, 11 months (95% CI, 9.5-12.4). The OS times between the two groups were also not significantly different (P= 0.07): CA, 27.5 months (95% CI, 22.8-31.2 months) vs. MWA, 18 months (95% CI, 12.5-23.5). For larger tumors (>3 cm), patients treated with MWA had significantly longer median PFS (P=0.04; MWA, 10.5 months vs. CA, 7.0 months) and OS times (P=0.04; MWA, 24.5 months vs. CA, 14.5 months) compared patients treated with CA. However, for smaller tumors (≤3 cm), median PFS (P= 0.79; MWA, 11.0 months vs. CA, 13.0 months) and OS times (P=0.39; MWA, 30.0 months vs. CA, 26.5 months) between the two groups did not differ significantly. The incidence rates of AEs were similar in the two groups (P>0.05). The number of applicators, tumor size and length of the lung traversed by applicators were associated with a higher risk of pneumothorax and intra-pulmonary hemorrhage in the two groups. Treatment with CA resulted in significantly less intraprocedural pain compared with treatment with MWA (P=0.001). Overall, the present study demonstrated that CA and MWA were comparably safe and effective procedures for the treatment of small tumors. However, treatment with MWA was superior compared with CA for the treatment of large tumors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparing cryoablation and microwave ablation for the treatment of patients with stage�IIIB/IV non‑small cell lung cancer

Das

Huang²,

et al. 2019

Oncol Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cryoablation can safely treat lesions adjacent to central bronchi and pulmonary vessels, 19 but adjunctive techniques can be very helpful in avoiding critical structures or decreasing the impact of thermal sinks from the heart or aorta. Iatrogenic pneumothorax is particularly useful in protecting the phrenic nerves, brachial plexus, or esophagus (►Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While cryoablation is more time consuming to perform and results in more radiation exposure than heat-based techniques (RFA or microwave ablation [MWA]) due to sequential computed tomography (CT) imaging during ice ball monitoring, advantages of cryoablation include the ability to visualize the ablation zone in near real time and reduced postprocedure pain relative to heat-based modalities. [16][17][18] The most important advantage of cryoablation may be its flexibility, as cryoablation is considered safer than RFA or MWA for both central and subpleural lesions 12,19 (►Fig. 1).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cryoablation of Lung Metastases: Review of Recent Literature and Ablation Technique

Eiken

Welch

2019

Semin intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Physical separation of the target organ and diaphragm using interposed fluid or gas is not always technically possible, and in certain cases the diaphragm may unavoidably be included in the ablation zone. In contrast to heat-based treatments, cryotherapy preserves the collagen matrix architecture of tissues, due to the remarkable resilience of collagen and fibroblasts to hypothermic conditions [4,5].…”

Section: To the Editormentioning

confidence: 98%