Safe and Effective Treatment for Kidney Cancer: Cryoablation

Safe and Effective Treatment for Kidney Cancer: Cryoablation

Cryoablation: A Promising Treatment Option for Kidney Cancer

It has been observed that cryoablation (freeze destruction) therapy has a very high effect on specific patient groups with kidney cancer.

Although not one of the most common types of cancer, kidney cancer has increased in recent years; it is essential because it is resistant to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and hormonal treatment. At this point, the basis of therapy in kidney cancers consists of surgical procedures in which all or part of the kidney is removed, along with the surrounding tissues, and targeted smart drugs. Smart drugs and immunotherapies are effective in advanced (4th) stage kidney cancers. However, these procedures are not always possible due to underlying diseases, borderline kidney functions, single kidney, cancer spread beyond the kidney, and advanced age. Therefore, alternative treatments are being studied. Among them, the cryoablation method has come to the fore in recent years and has achieved successful results. In this method, The tumor is destroyed by rapidly cooling and freezing with the help of needles by entering through a small hole in the skin.

In a meta-analysis study in which the results of studies to measure the effectiveness of cryoablation in kidney cancer were analyzed, The 5-year kidney cancer-specific survival rates of 4300 patients aged at least 66 years with a tumor diameter of 4 cm and less (stage T1a) were similar in cryoablation and partial nephrectomy surgery to remove a part of the kidney (95% and 98%, respectively). Overall 5-year survival rates were 77% with cryoablation and 86% with partial nephrectomy. Although partial nephrectomy promises better survival times, this difference is due to the selection of patients with a better general condition for surgery.

In the study, when the applications were compared regarding side effects, Cryoablation was advantageous regarding 30-day non-urological side effects (6% vs. 30%). In addition, rates of renal failure were lower with cryoablation than with partial nephrectomy (7% versus 3%).

In conclusion, the cryoablation technique, which has been observed to have a very high effect in specific patient groups in treating kidney cancer, deserves to be included much more in clinical applications with its safety profile. However, this method is not suitable for every kidney cancer. While it shows close to 100% effectiveness in tumors up to 4 cm, it is seen that it is not effective enough in more extensive tumors. Therefore, it is essential to determine the patient groups to which the cryoablation method will be applied and to perform it in experienced centers.