Evidence Hub

An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Technical, Oncologic, and Safety Outcomes of Microwave Ablation in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma

Jeremy Wu, S. Sami, K. Lajkosz, T. Kishibe, M. Ordon

Journal of endourology, 2023

1,584 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) has emerged as a new energy modality for percutaneous renal tumor ablation with potential advantages over radiofrequency and cryoablation. The goal of our study was to determine MWA outcomes for suspicious renal masses, with a subset analysis for biopsy-proven renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and larger (T1b) tumors. Methods: Studies reporting outcomes of MWA for RCC were identified. Random-effects models with inverse-variance weighting were used to pool outcomes, including technical success rate (TSR), technical efficacy rate (TER), local recurrence rate (LRR), cancer-specific survival rate (CSSR), overall survival rate (OSR), and complications. Results: Among 914 studies captured, 27 studies with 1584 patients (1683 malignant renal tumors) were included. The pooled TSR and TER were 99.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 98.0%–100%) and 96.2% (95% CI, 93.8%–98.2%). The pooled LRR was 3.2% (95% CI, 1.9%–4.7%). At 1, 3, and 5 years, the pooled CSSRs were 100% (95% CI, 99.4%–100%), 100% (95% CI, 98.4%–100%), and 97.7% (95% CI, 94.5%–99.7%), while pooled OSRs were 99.0% (95% CI, 97.5%–99.9%), 96.0% (95% CI, 93.1%–98.3%), and 88.1% (95% CI, 80.3%–94.2%). The pooled minor and major complication rates were 10.3% (95% CI, 7.1%–13.9%) and 1.0% (95% CI, 0.3%–2.1%). In 204 patients with 208 T1b tumors, the pooled TSR and TER were 100% (95% CI, 96.6%–100%) and 85.2% (95% CI, 71.0%–95.8%). The pooled LRR was 4.2% (95% CI, 0.9%–8.9%). At 1, 3,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,584 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free