NCT00922948

Cryoablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Small Renal Masses

A Prospective Randomized Pilot Trial of Cryoablation (CA) Versus Radio Frequency Ablation (RFA) for the Management of Small Renal Masses

• Status: Withdrawn
• Phase: Phase 2
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 0 (actual)
• Sponsor: St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 90 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

The purpose of this study is to verify the oncological efficacy and safety of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of small renal tumors.

Detailed description

By enrolling all patients treated with CA or RFA, this study will document for the first time the safety and the short and long term efficacy of CA compared to RFA as well as provide urologists and decision makers currently unavailable information on CA in Canada.

Conditions

• Renal Cancers

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	Cryoablation	Cryoneedles and one temperature probe are inserted under endoscopic and sonographic guidance.
PROCEDURE	Radiofrequency ablation	Thermal injury is the predominant mechanism of action of RFA. A high-frequency alternating current emitted from the exposed noninsulated portion of the electrode generates frictional heat, agitating ions in the tissue surrounding the tip of the needle.

Timeline

• Start date: 2010-03-01
• Primary completion: 2015-03-01
• Completion: 2015-03-01
• First posted: 2009-06-17
• Last updated: 2016-07-27

Locations

1 site across 1 country: Canada