Thermal Versus Impedance-Based Ablation of Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis

BackgroundPercutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of renal carcinoma has become an established treatment modality. However, thermal (TB) versus impedance-based (IB)-RF generators have not been previously compared.MethodsA literature search on the application of RFA for renal masses using TB or IB-RF generators was performed. The safety, efficacy, and long-term outcomes of TB versus IB-based RFA were assessed using the outcome measures of technical success, local recurrence rate, complications, and preservation of renal function.ResultsAcross the 27 included studies, pooled results suggested comparable results for technical success (TB-RFA 98.53 % vs. IB-RFA 98.78 %, P = 0.9813). Clinical efficacy results were also similar across both generators (91.0 % TB-RFA vs. 91.5 % IB-RFA; P = 0.73). At follow-up, no differences in renal function (relative risk [RR] 0.5, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.45–5.48), and local recurrence (RR 0.717, 95 % CI 0.49–1.50) were observed. The pooled proportion of overall complication rates was 13.1 % for TB-RFA and 11.5 % for IB-RFA.ConclusionNo differences in the observed parameters were found either during surgery or at follow-up.