dc.creatorYoung, Jennifer L.
dc.creatorMcCormick, David W.
dc.creatorKolla, Surrendra B.
dc.creatorSountoulides, Petros G.
dc.creatorKaufmann, Oskar G.
dc.creatorOrtiz-Vanderdys, Cervando G.
dc.creatorHuynh, Victor B.
dc.creatorKaplan, Adam G.
dc.creatorJain, Nick S.
dc.creatorPick, Donald L.
dc.creatorAndrade, Lorena A.
dc.creatorOsann, Kathryn E.
dc.creatorMcDougall, Elspeth M.
dc.creatorClayman, Ralph V.
dc.date.accessioned2013-10-30T11:35:59Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-04T16:09:47Z
dc.date.available2013-10-30T11:35:59Z
dc.date.available2018-07-04T16:09:47Z
dc.date.created2013-10-30T11:35:59Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifierUROLOGY, NEW YORK, v. 79, n. 2, supl. 2, Part 3, pp. 917-920, FEB, 2012
dc.identifier0090-4295
dc.identifierhttp://www.producao.usp.br/handle/BDPI/36731
dc.identifier10.1016/j.urology.2011.10.042
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2011.10.042
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1632245
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE To investigate the relationship between multiple cryoprobes was investigated to determine whether they work in an additive or synergistic fashion in an in vivo animal model because 1.47 mm (17-gauge) cryoprobes have been introduced to the armamentarium for renal cryotherapy. METHODS Laparoscopic-guided percutaneous cryoablation was performed in both renal poles of 3 pigs using 3 IceRod cryoprobes. These 12 cryolesions were compared with 12 cryolesions using a single IceRod cryoprobe. Each cycle consisted of two 10-minute freeze cycles separated by a 5-minute thaw. The iceball volume was measured using intraoperative ultrasonography. The kidneys were harvested, and cryolesion surface area was calculated. The lesions were fixed and excised to obtain a volume measurement. Statistical analysis was used to compare the single probe results multiplied by 3 to the multiple probe group for iceball volume, cryolesion surface area, and cryolesion volume. RESULTS The iceball volume for the first freeze cycle for the single cryoprobe multiplied by 3 was 8.55 cm(3) compared with 9.79 cm(3) for the multiple cryoprobe group (P = .44) and 10.01 cm(3) versus 16.58 cm(3) for the second freeze (P = .03). The cryolesion volume for the single cryoprobe multiplied by 3 was 11.29 cm(3) versus 14.75 cm(3) for the multiple cyroprobe group (P = .06). The gross cryolesion surface area for the single cryoprobe multiplied by 3 was 13.14 cm(2) versus 13.89 cm(2) for the multiple probe group (P = .52). CONCLUSION The cryolesion created by 3 simultaneously activated 1.47-mm probes appears to be larger than that of an additive effect. The lesions were significantly larger as measured by ultrasonography and nearly so (P = .06) as measured by the gross cryolesion volume. UROLOGY 79: 484.e1-484.e6, 2012. (c) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
dc.publisherNEW YORK
dc.relationUROLOGY
dc.rightsCopyright ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
dc.rightsclosedAccess
dc.titleAre Multiple Cryoprobes Additive or Synergistic in Renal Cryotherapy?
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución