Surgical Resection versus Re-Ablation for Intrahepatic Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Initial Ablation Therapy

Repeat hepatectomy versus thermal ablation therapy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the survival benefits of repeat hepatectomy (RH) and thermal ablation therapy (TAT) in managing recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in the PubMed, SinoMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science databases using relevant keywords to identify all studies published on this specific topic. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a fixed-effects model.

Results

This meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies, comprising 2580 patients with recurrent HCC, among whom 1189 underwent RH and 1394 underwent TAT. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the RH group exhibited superior overall survival (OS) (HR=0.85, 95%CI 0.76∼0.95, P=0.004) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=0.79, 95%CI 0.7∼0.9, P<0.01) compared to the TAT group. Regarding postoperative complications, the TAT group experienced fewer complications than the RH group (OR=3.23, 95%CI 1.48∼7.07, P=0.003), while no significant difference in perioperative mortality was observed between the two groups (OR=2.11, 95%CI 0.54∼8.19, P=0.28).

Conclusion

The present study demonstrates that, in comparison to TAT, RH may confer superior survival benefits for patients with recurrent HCC.

Outcomes after primary and repeat thermal ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma with or without liver transplantation

OBJECTIVES

Thermal ablation (TA) is an established treatment for early HCC. There is a lack of data on the efficacy of repeated TA for recurrent HCC, resulting in uncertainty whether good oncologic outcomes can be obtained without performing orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx). This study analyses outcomes after TA, with a special focus on repeat TA for recurrent HCC, either as a stand-alone therapy, or in relationship with OLTx.

METHODS

Data from a prospectively registered database on interventions for HCC in a tertiary hepatobiliary centre was completed with follow-up until December 2020. Outcomes studied were rate of recurrence after primary TA and after its repeat interventions, the occurrence of untreatable recurrence, OS and DSS after primary and repeat TA, and complications after TA. In cohorts matched for confounders, OSS and DSS were compared after TA with and without the intention to perform OLTx.

RESULTS

After TA, 100 patients (56·8%) developed recurrent HCC, of whom 76 (76·0%) underwent up to four repeat interventions. During follow-up, 76·7% of patients never developed a recurrence unamenable to repeat TA or OLTx. OS was comparable after primary TA and repeat TA. In matched cohorts, OS and DSS were comparable after TA with and without the intention to perform OLTx.

CONCLUSIONS

We found TA to be an effective and repeatable therapy for primary and recurrent HCC. Most recurrences can be treated with curative intent. There are patients who do well with TA alone without ever undergoing OLTx.

KEY POINTS

• Recurrent HCC after primary TA can often be treated effectively with repeat TA. Survival after repeat TA is comparable to primary TA. • In matched cohorts, outcomes after TA with and without subsequent waitlisting for OLTx are comparable. • There are patients who do well for many years with primary and repeat TA alone; some despite multiple recurrences.