PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes between robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) and cryoablation (CRYO), based on a 3-year experience at our Institution. Additionally, a secondary aim is to conduct a comparative cost analysis between the two procedures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted, including patients who underwent RAPN or CRYO between January 2020 and December 2023. Group 1 consisted of 59 patients who underwent RAPN, while Group 2 included 38 patients who had CRYO. The evaluation parameters included baseline characteristics, perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes, as well as total hospitalization costs. RESULTS: Operative time (OT), average length of hospital stay (LOS), and emetic blood loss (EBL) were significantly lower in the CRYO group. Furthermore, CRYO showed a significantly lower rate of postoperative complications of any grade (7.8% vs 16.9%)
however, this was associated with a considerably higher recurrence rate (5.7% vs 1.7%). No substantial differences were found in long-term functional outcomes (ΔeGFR). In terms of costs, CRYO was more cost-effective than RAPN (€5473 vs €10,672), although the gap was partially offset by a higher reimbursement "DRG" rate for robotic partial nephrectomy (€7386 vs €4384). CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) remains the preferred option for treating small renal masses (sRM), providing excellent oncological results and acceptable morbidity. However, percutaneous cryoablation is a valid alternative, particularly for patients unfit for surgery, as long as meticulous postoperative follow-up is carried out.