Meta-analysis of Percutaneous vs. Surgical Approaches Radiofrequency Ablation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

被引:5
|
作者
Huang, Xiaozhun [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Yibin [3 ]
Xu, Lin [1 ,2 ]
Ma, Teng [1 ,2 ]
Yin, Xin [1 ,2 ]
Huang, Zhangkan [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Caibin [1 ,2 ]
Huang, Zhen [4 ]
Bi, Xinyu [4 ]
Che, Xu [1 ,2 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Canc Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Canc, Dept Hepatobiliary Surg,Natl Canc Ctr, Shenzhen, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Shenzhen Hosp, Shenzhen, Peoples R China
[3] Longgang Dist Cent Hosp Shenzhen, Dept Gen Surg, Shenzhen, Peoples R China
[4] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Canc Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Canc, Dept Hepatobiliary Surg,Natl Canc Ctr, Beijing, Peoples R China
[5] Chinese Acad Med Sci & Peking Union Med Coll, Canc Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Canc, Dept Gastrointestinal & Pancreat Surg,Natl Canc C, Beijing, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY | 2022年 / 8卷
关键词
radiofrequency ablation; hepatocellular carcinoma; surgical; percutaneous; meta-analysis; LIVER-TUMORS; THERMAL ABLATION; LOCAL RECURRENCE; MILAN CRITERIA; RESECTION; COMPLICATIONS; SURVIVAL; THERAPY; RISK;
D O I
10.3389/fsurg.2021.788771
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a curative modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who are not suitable for resection. It remains controversial whether a surgical or percutaneous approach is more appropriate for HCC.Method: A search was performed on the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from the date of database inception until April 17, 2021. Studies reporting outcomes of comparisons between surgical RFA (SRFA) and percutaneous RFA (PRFA) were included in this study. The meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software.Result: A total of 10 retrospective studies containing 12 cohorts, involving 740 patients in the PRFA group and 512 patients in the SRFA group, were selected. Although the tumor size in PRFA group was smaller than the SRFA group (p = 0.007), there was no significant difference in complete ablation rate between the SRFA and PRFA groups (95.63% and 97.33%, respectively; Odds ratio [OR], 0.56; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.26-1.24; p = 0.15). However, the SRFA group showed a significantly lower local tumor recurrence than the PRFA group in the sensitivity analysis (28.7% in the PRFA group and 21.79% in the SRFA group, respectively; OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.14-2.95; p = 0.01). Pooled analysis data showed that the rate of severe perioperative complications did not differ significantly between the PRFA and SRFA groups (14.28% and 12.11%, respectively; OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.67-2.53; p = 0.44). There was no significant difference in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates, as well as the 1- and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) between the PRFA and SRFA groups. The 5-year DFS of the PRFA group was significantly lower than the SRFA group (hazard ratio 0.73; 95% CI 0.54-0.99).Conclusion: Based on our meta-analysis, the surgical route was superior to PRFA in terms of local control rate. Furthermore, the surgical approach did not increase the risk of major complications.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Meta-analysis of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus ethanol injection in hepatocellular carcinoma
    Bouza, Carmen
    Lopez-Cuadrado, Teresa
    Alcazar, Raimundo
    Saz-Parkinson, Zuleika
    Maria Amate, Jose
    BMC GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2009, 9
  • [12] Surgical resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in treatment of Hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta analysis
    Jaganmohan, Sathya
    Agarwal, Suneal
    Kasturi, Krishna S.
    Sood, Gagan
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2008, 134 (04) : A47 - A47
  • [13] Comparison of percutaneous and surgical approaches for radiofrequency ablation of small and medium hepatocellular carcinoma
    Khan, Muhammad Rizwan
    Poon, Ronnie T. P.
    Ng, Kelvin K.
    Chan, Albert C.
    Yuen, Jimmy
    Tung, Helen
    Tsang, Jason
    Fan, Sheung Tat
    ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2007, 142 (12) : 1136 - 1143
  • [14] Stereotactic body radiotherapy vs radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis
    Facciorusso, Antonio
    Chierici, Andrea
    Cincione, Ivan
    Sacco, Rodolfo
    Ramai, Daryl
    Mohan, Babu P.
    Chandan, Saurabh
    Ofosu, Andrew
    Cotsoglou, Christian
    EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTICANCER THERAPY, 2021, 21 (06) : 681 - 688
  • [15] Percutaneous microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Yu, Qian
    Liu, Chenyu
    Navuluri, Rakesh
    Ahmed, Osman
    ABDOMINAL RADIOLOGY, 2021, 46 (09) : 4467 - 4475
  • [16] Percutaneous microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Qian Yu
    Chenyu Liu
    Rakesh Navuluri
    Osman Ahmed
    Abdominal Radiology, 2021, 46 : 4467 - 4475
  • [17] Radiofrequency Ablation versus Cryosurgery Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis
    Huang, Yao-Zhen
    Zhou, Shi-Chun
    Zhou, Hongyu
    Tong, Mingwei
    HEPATO-GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2013, 60 (125) : 1131 - 1135
  • [18] Clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation and surgical resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis
    Li, Le
    Zhang, Jialin
    Liu, Xiaohua
    Li, Xiaohang
    Jiao, Baoping
    Kang, Tieli
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2012, 27 (01) : 51 - 58
  • [19] Radiofrequency ablation versus surgical resection for intrahepatic hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence: a meta-analysis
    Chen, Xuxiao
    Chen, Yongjun
    Li, Qinyu
    Ma, Di
    Shen, Baiyong
    Peng, Chenghong
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2015, 195 (01) : 166 - 174
  • [20] Efficacy and safety of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus surgical resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of 23 studies
    Feng, Qian
    Chi, Yugang
    Liu, Yanqian
    Zhang, Ling
    Liu, Qi
    JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2015, 141 (01) : 1 - 9