Leave your phone number and we will contact you as soon as possible
Ask a dozen oncologists about cryoablation, and you’ll likely get a dozen nuanced answers. Some see it as a fallback option. Others – especially those working with renal or hepatic lesions – consider it essential. Either way, cryotherapy for cancer has come a long way to become a new professional treatment method. Today, it’s a precise, image-guided procedure that earns its place in the toolbox not for what it replaces, but for the new spaces it fills.
The basic principle hasn’t changed: extreme cold can kill cells. Our ability to apply cold has evolved. Now we can control it precisely enough to preserve the healthy tissue surrounding the tumor. In cryoablation treatment, probes are inserted directly into the lesion – usually under CT or ultrasound guidance – and argon gas is circulated to drive temperatures down quickly. Ice forms inside the cells and their structures rupture. Then comes the thaw, which isn’t just incidental – it’s part of the mechanism. Repeating the freeze-thaw cycle increases tissue death.
The process tends to leave a visible ice ball that, in real-time imaging, lets the operator see just how far the freeze is reaching. That visibility is part of what sets cryo apart from heat-based ablation. Surgeons like it. Radiologists like it. Patients? Most don’t know the difference – just that they didn’t need major surgery.
There are places where cryoablation shines, and others where it simply doesn’t belong. It works best for tumors that are small, localized, and hard to reach without risking functional structures. Doctors use it most commonly in:
In these cases, it’s not about finding an alternative oncology cure. It’s about balancing effectiveness with risk – and cryo often tips that scale gently in its favor.
But it’s not universal. Large tumors? Not ideal. Anything with extensive vascular involvement? Proceed carefully. And let’s be honest: this is a technique that’s highly operator-dependent. A good cryoablationist makes the procedure look simple. A novice might under-freeze or over-freeze – both with consequences.
You’ll sometimes hear talk about cancer hypothermia triggering an immune response. The idea is compelling: freeze the tumor, release its contents, and maybe – just maybe – the immune system learns something useful. There are animal models that show this. A few patient cases, too. But the science isn’t settled.
Immunotherapy combinations with cryoablation are being explored, especially in solid tumors with poor baseline response. But for now, it’s investigational, not standard of care.Just leave a request on our website, and we’ll put you in touch with a specialist who really fits your situation. We work closely with leading doctors across different oncology centers to make sure you get the right care, from the right expert.
It’s fighting tumor cells making them die. The frozen cells undergo necrosis, and the immune system eventually clears the dead tissue. In some cases, a small fibrous mass remains visible for months. It’s not instant, but it’s reliable.
In the right context – say, a small renal mass or a single liver metastasis – it can be just as effective as surgery, with a lot less downtime. The key is careful patient selection. It’s not a cure-all, but it’s a smart option.
Renal tumors lead the list. Then come hepatic metastases, low-grade prostate tumors, and skeletal lesions causing pain. It’s not about what you can freeze – it’s about what you should.
