Yuksel, MBKarakose, AGumus, BTarhan, SAtesci, YZAkan, Z2025-04-102025-04-101513-7368http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14701/38110Background: To evaluate the results of various types of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) treatment of renal tumors in patients with excessive anesthetic and surgical risk. Materials and Methods: Data for RFA performed in in high risk patients were retrospectively evaluated. Other RFA applications in patients with no anesthetic and/or surgical risk were excluded. RFA was by ultrasound or CT guided percutaneous (USG/CT-PRFA) and retroperitoneally or transperitoneally laparoscopic (R/T-LRFA) techniques under general or local anethesia. Follow-up data of enhanced CT or MRI after 1, 3 and 6 months were analysed for twelve RFA applications. Results: The RFA applications included 4 (40%) left-sided, 5 (50%) right-sided and 1 (10%) bilaterally RFA (simultaneously 1 right and 2 left). The localizations of tumors were 2 (16.6%) upper, 5 (41.6%) mid and 5 (41.6%) lower pole. The RFA applications included 9 (75%) USG-PRFA, 1 (8.3%) CT-PRFA, 1 (8.3%) T-LRFA and 1 (8.3%) R-LRFA. The mean age was 65.3 +/- 8.5 (52-76) years. The mean tumor size was 29.6 +/- 6.08 (15-40) mm. No complications related to the RFA were encountered in any of the cases. Failure (residual tumour) was determined in 8.3% (1/12) of USG-RFA application. The success rate was thus 91.7% (11/12). Other 1st, 3rd and 6th months follow-up data revealed no residua and recurrence. Conclusions: RFA application appears to be safe as a less invasive and effective treatment modality in selected cases of small renal tumors in individuals with excessive anesthetic and also surgical risk.EnglishAnalysis of Radiofrequency Ablation of Small Renal Tumors in Patients at High Anesthetic and Surgical Risk: Urologist Experience with Follow-up Results in the Initial Six MonthsArticle