Single-center comparison of complications in laparoscopic and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation with ultrasound guidance for renal tumors

Objective: To report on postoperative complications associated with laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) in a single-center experience.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of medical records for patients undergoing LRFA or PRFA between February 2006 and March 2010 at our center. Demographics, radiographic variables, and complication rates were compared between the 2 groups. Risk factors for postoperative complications after operation were analyzed with multivariate logistic regression.

Results: Of a total 191 patients included in this study, 132 underwent LRFA and 59 underwent PRFA. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to age, gender, biopsy data, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, body mass index, single kidney, tumor size, tumor number, glomerular filtration rate, follow-up, or RENAL nephrometry score. We observed complications in 16 LRFA procedures (12.1%) and 10 PRFA procedures (16.9%) (P = .369). There was no difference in the distribution of the complications between LRFA and PRFA groups. The complication (grades 1 and 2) rate in the LRFA group (7.6%) was not significantly different from that in the PRFA group (10.2%) (P = .550). The complication (grade 3a) rate in the LRFA group (4.5%) was not significantly different from that in the PRFA group (6.8%) (P = .522). A multivariate analysis disclosed that extra ablation time was the only predictor of postoperative complications.

Conclusion: Significantly more anterior tumors were approached laparoscopically, and significantly more posterior tumors were approached percutaneously. Complication rate was not significantly different between LRFA and PRFA. Extra ablation time was a significant risk factor associated with postoperative complications.