Table 2


Author (year)/typeStudy locationSubjectType of cryoablationControl groupDecreased hospital LOSImproved pain scoreDecreased narcotic useIncreased operative timeIncreased complication rateGrade
Nelson et al (1974)14/NRCTSilver Spring, Maryland38DirectNo cryon/an/a+n/an/aLow
Glynn et al (1980)15/NRCTAbingdon, UK58 (29 cryo)DirectNo cryon/a+n/an/aLow
Katz et al (1980)16/RCTSan Diego, California24 (15 cryo)DirectLocal anesthetics/no blockn/a++n/an/aLow/moderate
Maiwand and Makey (1981)17/DescriptiveLondon, UK100DirectNonen/an/an/an/an/aVery low
Brynitz and Schrøder (1986)18/RCTCopenhagen, Denmark27 (14 cryo)DirectNo blockn/an/a+n/an/aVery low
Bucerius et al (2000)19/RCTLeipzig, Germany39 (21 cryo); 18 (9 cryo)DirectLocal anesthetics/no blockn/a+n/an/aHigh
Yang et al (2004)20/RCTSeoul, South Korea90 (45 cryo+epidural)DirectEpidural onlyn/a+ (POD 7)+High
Clemence et al (2020)21/Retro cohortToronto, Canada117 (25 cryo)DirectNo cryo+n/an/aLow
  • LOS, length of stay; n/a, not applicable; NRCT, non-randomized controlled trial; RCT, randomized controlled trial.