Breast cryoablation has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to lumpectomy for selected patients with small, biologically favorable breast cancers. Its appeal lies in the combination of focal tumor destruction, outpatient treatment under local anesthesia, low procedural burden, and potentially improved cosmetic and functional outcomes. However, cryoablation should not be viewed as a simple technical substitute for surgery: its oncologic credibility depends on appropriate tumor selection, accurate imaging-based staging, adequate ablative margins, and coherent integration with adjuvant therapy and follow-up. This review summarizes the current evidence on breast cryoablation, focusing on biological rationale, validation studies with surgical confirmation, prospective non-excision cohorts, practical indications, and post-ablation imaging surveillance. Surgical-validation studies show that cryoablation can achieve high rates of complete tumor destruction, but mainly in a narrow subgroup of small, ultrasound-visible, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative invasive ductal carcinomas, particularly those measuring 15–20 mm or less. These studies also show that failure often reflects occult multifocality or underestimation of microscopic disease extent rather than failure to destroy the index lesion itself. Prospective non-excision studies, particularly ICE3 and FROST, have moved the field beyond feasibility alone. In highly selected older women with low-risk tumors, ICE3 reported a low 5-year ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence rate of 4.3%, while FROST showed similarly encouraging local control, with a 5-year ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence rate of 3.6%, and underscored the importance of structured post-ablation verification. These results also reflect technical progress, as single-probe liquid nitrogen platforms have simplified and standardized treatment delivery compared with earlier multi-probe approaches. Current evidence therefore supports cryoablation only within a narrow clinical setting. Broader adoption will require standardized patient selection, harmonised adjuvant strategies, robust imaging follow-up, and comparative trials against surgery or endocrine therapy-based approaches.