Combined transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation versus hepatectomy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after initial surgery: a propensity score matching study
- 89 Downloads
To compare retrospectively the efficacy of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (TACE-RFA) with that of repeat hepatectomy in the treatment of initial recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after hepatectomy by propensity score matching (PSM).
From September 2006 to June 2015, 186 patients who underwent TACE-RFA (n=107) or repeat hepatectomy (n=79) for recurrent HCC ≤ 5.0 cm were included. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared. PSM was used to correct potential confounding factors between these two groups.
1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates after TACE-RFA and repeat hepatectomy were 84.6%, 66.9%, 49.1%, and 84.8%, 60.2%, 51.9%, respectively (p=.871). The corresponding DFS rates were 58.2%, 35.2%, 29.6% and 64.8%, 41.6%, 38.3% (p=.258). TACE-RFA has lower major complication rates (p=.009) and shorter hospital stay (p<.001). After PSM, 1-, 3-, 5- year OS rates after TACE-RFA (n=51) and repeat hepatectomy (n=51) were 84.3%, 60.4%, 46.4% and 84.3%, 64.5%, 49.8% (p=.951), the corresponding DFS rates were 54.9%, 35.0%, 30.6% and 58.7%, 35.8%, and 33.6% (p=.733). AFP and micro-vessel invasion of initial tumour were significant prognostic factors for OS and DFS, respectively.
TACE-RFA provides comparable OS and DFS to repeat hepatectomy, fewer major complications and shorter hospital stay.
• TACE-RFA achieved similar OS and DFS with repeat hepatectomy for recurrent HCC
• Major complication rate was lower in the TACE-RFA group
• The hospital stay was shorter in the TACE-RFA group
• AFP was a predictor for OS, MVI was a predictor for DFS
• The treatment strategies were not significant prognostic factor for OS or DFS
KeywordsCarcinoma, Hepatocellular Hepatectomy Propensity Score Chemoembolization, Therapeutic Radio waves
Contrast-enhanced computed tomography
Contrast enhanced ultrasound
Local tumour progression
Propensity score matching
Nothing to declare.
Compliance with ethical standards
The scientific guarantor of this publication is Ming Kuang.
Conflict of interest
The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.
Statistics and biometry
No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper
Written informed consent was waived in this study.
Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.
• performed at one institution
- 9.Morimoto M, Numata K, Kondou M, Nozaki A, Morita S, Tanaka K (2010) Midterm outcomes in patients with intermediate-sized hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomized controlled trial for determining the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. Cancer 116:5452–5460CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Sobin LHWC (2002) TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. John Wiley, Hoboken, NJGoogle Scholar
- 20.Cancer NIO (2010) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events ( CTCAE ).Google Scholar
- 24.Takuma Y, Takabatake H, Morimoto Y et al (2013) Comparison of combined transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and radiofrequency ablation with surgical resection by using propensity score matching in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria. Radiology 269:927–937CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar