Transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Liver Transplant Setting

Liver transplantation is currently the only curative therapy for patients with liver cirrhosis. Not all patients in the natural course of the disease will undergo transplantation, but the majority of them will experience portal hypertension and its complications. In addition to medical and endoscopic therapy, a key role in managing these complications is played by the placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Some indications for TIPS placement are well-established, and they are expanding and broadening over time. This review aims to describe the role of TIPS in managing patients with liver cirrhosis, in light of liver transplantation. As far as it is known, TIPS placement seems not to affect the surgical aspects of liver transplantation, in terms of intraoperative bleeding rates, postoperative complications, or length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit. However, the placement of a TIPS "towards transplant" can offer advantages in terms of ameliorating a patient's clinical condition at the time of transplantation and improving patient survival. Additionally, the TIPS procedure can help preserve the technical feasibility of the transplant itself. In this context, indications for TIPS placement at an earlier stage are drawing particular attention. However, TIPS insertion in decompensated patients can also lead to serious adverse events. For these reasons, further studies are needed to make reliable recommendations for TIPS in the pre-transplant setting.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may improve access to curative therapies, treat portal hypertension (PH)-related complications without worsening liver function, and increase overall survival. Data on the efficacy and safety of TIPS to treat PH complications in HCC patients, as well as the HCC treatment response, were evaluated.

METHODS

Studies reporting efficacy in controlling bleeding/ascites or response to HCC therapy, safety, and survival in patients with HCC and TIPS were searched systematically on PubMed and Embase. An extraction of articles using predefined data fields and quality indicators was used.

RESULTS

We selected 19 studies and found 937 patients treated for ascites/bleeding and 177 evaluating HCC treatment response. Over half were under 5 cm and solitary lesions, and most studies included tumours with portal vein thrombosis. Regarding PH studies, TIPS resolved bleeding/ascites in >60% of patients, more effective for bleeding. There were no lethal complications reported and procedural bleeding occurred in <5%. Hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 15%-30% within three months. In the HCC treatment-response studies, major complication rates were low with no mortality. In the studies that evaluated the response to transarterial chemoembolization, complete response rate of patients with TIPS varied from 16% to 75%. Liver transplantation rate varied from 8% to 80%, with >40% rate in half of the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In the published studies, TIPS is effective in treating PH complications in patients with HCC. Prospective studies on TIPS placement in patients with HCC are urgently needed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TIPS in this setting.

The Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) in Treating Portal Hypertension in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver cancer is very frequent, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for the majority of liver cancer cases. Its growing incidence has been greatly affected by the increasing prevalence of metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). The latter is a new epidemic in our era. In fact, HCC is often generated from noncirrhotic liver and its treatment benefits from surgical and nonsurgical approaches, potentially bridged by transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) use. TIPS use is an effective treatment for portal hypertension complications, but its application in patients with HCC and clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) remains controversial due to concerns about tumor rupture, dissemination, and increased toxicity. The technical feasibility and safety of TIPS use in HCC patients have been evaluated in several studies. Despite concerns about intraprocedural complications, retrospective studies have shown high success rates and low complication rates in TIPS placement for HCC patients. TIPS use in combination with locoregional treatments, such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) or transarterial radioembolization (TARE), has been explored as a treatment option for HCC patients with portal hypertension. These studies have shown improved survival rates in patients undergoing TIPS in combination with locoregional treatments. However, the efficacy and toxicity of TACE in combination with TIPS use require careful evaluation, as changes in venous and arterial flow can affect treatment outcomes and complications. The results from studies evaluating the impact of TIPS on systemic therapy and surgical options are also promising. In conclusion, the TIPS is a sufficiently safe, useful item available for physicians treating complications of portal hypertension. Moreover, a TIPS can be used in combination with locoregional therapy in HCC patients. Systemic chemotherapy can also benefit of the use of TIPS placement. A complex interplay affects TIPS use with surgery. The latter needs further data. The TIPS is a useful and safe add-on treatment, changing the natural course of HCC progression. Its use is regulated by a sophisticated physiologic and pathophysiologic flow of evidence.

Combined Use of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt and Transarterial Chemoembolization in the Treatment of Esophageal and Gastric Variceal Bleeding: A Retrospective Study of 80 Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Portal Hypertension

Background

The main cause of death in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal hypertension is esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding caused by severe portal hypertension; therefore, the treatment of portal hypertension is particularly important to prolong the survival of patients. The therapeutic efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for HCC with esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding has been rarely reported. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical efficacy of TIPS combined with TACE in the treatment of HCC with esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding.

Material/Methods

A total of 80 patients with HCC with esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding from July 2015 to November 2019 were retrospectively investigated. Clinical outcomes, biochemical indexes, and complications were compared between TIPS plus TACE and endoscopy plus TACE treatments.

Results

Gastrointestinal rebleeding and adverse reactions (P<0.05) after TIPS combined with TACE were lower than that after endoscopy combined with TACE treatment. Furthermore, TIPS plus TACE had superior clinical outcomes than endoscopy plus TACE, which was associated with promising progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and disease control rate, and improved liver function.

Conclusions

TIPS combined with TACE was better than endoscopy combined with TACE in the treatment of patients with HCC and esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding. TIPS combined with TACE had a better therapeutic effect on improving liver function and prolonging patient survival time.

Effect of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt on transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) usually occurs accompanied by portal hypertension. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) is recommended as an effective treatment in HCC. Recent studies had conflicting results regarding the effectiveness and safety of TACE for HCC in patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the influence of TIPS on the effectiveness and safety of TACE for patients with HCC.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of studies among PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library was conducted, from the earliest publishing date to January 27th, 2020. Statistical analyses were all performed using the Stata 13.0 software. I2 index statistic was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Six studies with a total of 536 patients with HCC were included in the analysis. The pooled response rate was 51% (95% CI: 25% to 77%) with a significant heterogeneity (I2=93.3%, p < 0.001). The TACE + TIPS group had an inferior response rate than the non-TIPS group, but the difference had no statistical significance (p = 0.171) and heterogeneity was low (I2=0.00%, p = 0.490). Pooled hepatic failure rate was 8.8% (95% CI: 5.2% to 12.4%) with low heterogeneity (I2=0.0%, p = 0.747). But the pooled hepatic failure rate increased to 12.7% (95% CI: 5.7% to 19.7%) with low heterogeneity (I2=11.5%, p = 0.323) if the patients who received TIPS after TACE were excluded.

CONCLUSION

TIPS does not influence the effectiveness of TACE, but attention should be paid to the risk of hepatic failure.

Drug-eluting beads TACE is safe and non-inferior to conventional TACE in HCC patients with TIPS

Objectives

This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness between transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with drug-eluting beads (DEB-TACE) and conventional TACE (cTACE) using lipiodol-based regimens in HCC patients with a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

Methods

This retrospective study included patients with patent TIPS who underwent TACE from January 2013 to January 2019 that received either DEB-TACE (DEB-TACE group, n = 57) or cTACE (cTACE group, n = 62). The complications, liver toxicity, overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), and objective response rate (ORR) were compared between the groups.

Results

Altogether, 119 patients (50 ± 11 years, 107 men) were evaluated. The incidence of adverse events, including abdominal pain within 7 days (45.6% vs 79.0%, p < 0.001) and hepatic failure within 30 days (5.3% vs 19.4%, p = 0.027), were significantly lower in the DEB-TACE group than in the cTACE group. Compared to the cTACE group, the DEB-TACE group also showed mild liver toxicities in terms of increased total bilirubin (8.8% vs 22.6%), alanine aminotransferase (5.3% vs 21.0%), and aspartate aminotransferase (10.5% vs 29.0%) levels. The DEB-TACE group had better ORR than the cTACE group (70.2% vs 50.0%). The median OS and TTP were longer in the DEB-TACE group (11.4 vs 9.1 months, hazard ratio [HR] = 2.46, p < 0.001; 6.9 vs 5.2 months, HR = 1.47, p = 0.045). Multivariable analysis showed that α-fetoprotein levels, Barcelona clinic liver cancer stage, and treatment allocation were independent predictors of OS.

Conclusion

DEB-TACE is safe and effective in HCC patients with a TIPS and is potentially superior to cTACE in terms of complications, liver toxicities, OS, TTP, and ORR.

Key Points

• DEB-TACE is safe and effective in HCC patients after a TIPS procedure.

• DEB-TACE improves overall survival, objective response rate, and liver toxicities and is non-inferior to cTACE in terms of time to progression.

• DEB-TACE might be a potential new therapeutic option for HCC patients with TIPS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00330-021-07834-9.

Safety and efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt combined with palliative treatment in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

There is a close relationship between cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has good clinical effect in treating the complication of portal hypertension. However, because of the risk of postoperative liver failure, severe complications, and low survival rate for HCC, TIPS is contraindicated in patients with portal hypertension and liver cancer. We studied a large cohort of patients with cirrhosis and HCC who underwent TIPS for recurrent variceal bleeding and/or ascites.

AIM

To assess the safety, efficacy, and survival rate in patients with HCC who underwent TIPS.

METHODS

Group A comprised 217 patients with HCC and portal hypertension who underwent the TIPS procedure between 1999 and 2014. After TIPS deployment, these patients received palliative treatment for HCC. Group B comprised a cohort of 136 HCC patients with portal hypertension who did not undergo TIPS placement. Group B received palliative treatment for HCC plus medical therapy for portal hypertension. The clinical outcomes and survival rate were assessed.

RESULTS

In Group A, the primary technical success rate was 97.69% for TIPS placement, and no severe procedure-related complications of TIPS placement were reported. The control of variceal bleeding (VB) within 1 mo did not differ significantly between the groups (P = 0.261). Absorption of refractory ascites within 1 mo, recurrence of VB, and recurrence of refractory ascites differed significantly between the groups (P = 0.017, 0.023, and 0.009, respectively). By comparison, the rate of hepatic encephalopathy in Group B was lower than that in Group A (P = 0.036). The 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year survival rates were significantly different between Groups A and B (χ² = 12.227, P = 0.018; χ² = 12.457, P = 0.014; χ² = 26.490, P = 0.013; χ² = 21.956, P = 0.009, and χ² = 24.596, P = 0.006, respectively). The mean survival time was 43.7 mo in Group A and 31.8 mo in Group B. Median survival time was 50.0 mo in Group A and 33.0 mo in Group B. Mean and median survival differed significantly between the two groups (P = 0.000, χ² = 35.605, log-rank test). The mortality rate from VB in Group A was low than that in Group B (P = 0.006), but the rates of hepatic tumor, hepatic failure, and multiorgan failure did not differ significantly between the two groups (P = 0.173, 0.246 and 0.257, respectively).

CONCLUSION

TIPS combined with palliative treatment is safe and effective for portal hypertension in patients with HCC.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt as a bridge to liver transplant: Current state and future directions

Liver transplantation is one of the mainstays of treatment for liver failure due to severe chronic liver disease. Bridging therapies, such as placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), are frequently employed to control complications of portal hypertension such as ascites, hydrothorax, and variceal bleeding, and thereby reduce morbidity in patients awaiting transplant. There is no significant difference seen in either graft survival or patient survival between those receiving TIPS pre-transplant and those who do not, although those receiving TIPS placement on average have a longer waiting time on the transplant waitlist. Locoregional therapies, such as thermal ablation or chemoembolization, can be efficacious in patients with HCC and pre-existing TIPS; however there is a risk for increased adverse events in patients receiving these therapies who have TIPS compared to those who do not. In summary, TIPS is a safe, effective treatment that can be used to ameliorate the complications that are sequelae of portal hypertension. While it does not appear to improve survival post-transplant, TIPS placement pre-transplant may increase survival time to transplant, thus improving overall survival as well as quality of life.

Combined transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and other interventions for hepatocellular carcinoma with portal hypertension

AIM: To evaluate combination transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and other interventions for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and portal hypertension.

METHODS: Two hundred and sixty-one patients with HCC and portal hypertension underwent TIPS combined with other interventional treatments (transarterial chemoembolization/transarterial embolization, radiofrequency ablation, hepatic arterio-portal fistulas embolization, and splenic artery embolization) from January 1997 to January 2010 at Beijing Shijitan Hospital. Two hundred and nine patients (121 male and 88 female, aged 25-69 years, mean 48.3 ± 12.5 years) with complete clinical data were recruited. We evaluated the safety of the procedure (procedure-related death and serious complications), change of portal vein pressure before and after TIPS, symptom relief [e.g., ascites, hydrothorax, esophageal gastric-fundus variceal bleeding (EGVB)], cumulative rates of survival, and distributary channel restenosis. The characteristics of the patients surviving ≥ 5 and < 5 years were also analyzed.

RESULTS: The portosystemic pressure was decreased from 29.0 ± 4.1 mmHg before TIPS to 18.1 ± 2.9 mmHg after TIPS (t = 69.32, P < 0.05). Portosystemic pressure was decreased and portal hypertension symptoms were ameliorated. During the 5 year follow-up, the total recurrence rate of resistant ascites or hydrothorax was 7.2% (15/209); 36.8% (77/209) for EGVB; and 39.2% (82/209) for hepatic encephalopathy. The cumulative rates of distributary channel restenosis at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years were 17.2% (36/209), 29.7% (62/209), 36.8% (77/209), 45.5% (95/209) and 58.4% (122/209), respectively. No procedure-related deaths and serious complications (e.g., abdominal bleeding, hepatic failure, and distant metastasis) occurred. Moreover, Child-Pugh score, portal vein tumor thrombosis, lesion diameter, hepatic arterio-portal fistulas, HCC diagnosed before or after TIPS, stent type, hepatic encephalopathy, and type of other interventional treatments were related to 5 year survival after comparing patient characteristics.

CONCLUSION: TIPS combined with other interventional treatments seems to be safe and efficacious in patients with HCC and portal hypertension.

Repeated transcatheter arterial chemoembolization is safe for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the safety and long-term outcomes of repeated transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) in cirrhotic patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

METHODS

Data of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, who had previous TIPS implantation and received TACE between January 2010 and December 2012, were reviewed retrospectively. The primary outcome measure was liver function, which was represented by model for end-stage liver disease score, Child-Pugh-Turcotte score, serum total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, and aspartate aminotransferase. Changes in liver function before and after the initial TACE procedure and hepatobiliary severe adverse events (SAEs) were compared. Liver function following the initial TACE session was compared with that obtained in later TACE sessions. The secondary outcome measures were tumor response to multiple TACE sessions and survival.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients underwent at least two TACE sessions, while nine patients underwent at least three sessions during the follow-up period. There was no statistically significant difference between the liver function tests performed before and one-month after the TACE procedure. Grade 3 or 4 SAEs occurred in six (31.6 %) patients within one month. The one, two-, and three-year survival rates were 88%, 53%, and 32%, respectively. Tumor response of multiple TACE sessions was the only predictive risk factor of mortality (OR=4.40; P = 0.030; 95% CI, 1.15-16.85).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that repeated TACE is safe in selected patients with TIPS.

Safety and efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization in patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts

BACKGROUND

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an important option as the majority of patients present with advanced disease. Data regarding treatment outcomes in patients who have undergone transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) are limited. The present study seeks to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TACE in HCC patients with a TIPS.

METHODS

A retrospective review identifying patients with HCC and concomitant TIPS who were treated with TACE was performed.

RESULTS

From 1999 to 2014, 16 patients with HCC underwent a total of 27 TACE procedures; eight patients required multiple treatments. The median patient age at the time of the initial TACE was 60.5 years [interquartile range (IQR) : 52.5-67.5] with the majority being male (n = 12, 75%) and Childs-Pugh Class B (n = 12, 75%). At 6 weeks after TACE, 56.3% of patients achieved an objective response rate (complete and partial response) by mRECIST criteria. Clavien Grade 3 or higher complications occurred in 11.1% of TACE procedures. There were no peri-procedural deaths. The median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 9 and 22 months, respectively, when censored for liver transplantation (median follow-up: 11.5 months).

CONCLUSION

TACE is an effective treatment strategy for HCC in TIPS patients; albeit may be associated with higher complication rates.

Classification and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma: an aid to clinical decision-making

Classification and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma in a way that allows optimal treatment selection is challenging. This article summarizes some of the classification and staging schemes and discusses the conceptual framework that guides optimal treatment selection for each patient. The article does not exhaustively discuss each staging system proposed in the last three decades, but rather reviews the most commonly used staging systems, evaluates the rationale behind some of the newer staging systems, and compares them focusing on their use in clinical decision-making, notably choice of therapy.

Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients with Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts

PURPOSE

To assess radiofrequency (RF) ablation efficacy, as well as the patency of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs), in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective database review of patients with pre-existing TIPS undergoing RF ablation of HCC was conducted over a 159-month period ending in November 2013. TIPS patency pre- and post-RF ablation was assessed by ultrasound, angiography, and/or contrast-enhanced CT or MRI. Patient demographics and immediate post-RF ablation outcomes and complications were also reviewed.

RESULTS

19 patients with 21 lesions undergoing 25 RF ablation sessions were included. Child-Pugh class A, B, and C scores were seen in 1, 13, and 5 patients, respectively. Eleven patients (58 %) ultimately underwent liver transplantation. Immediate technical success was seen in all ablation sessions without residual tumor enhancement (100 %). No patients (0 %) suffered liver failure within 1 month of ablation. Pre-ablation TIPS patency was demonstrated in 22/25 sessions (88 %). Of 22 cases with patent TIPS prior to ablation, post-ablation patency was demonstrated in 22/22 (100 %) at immediate post-ablation imaging and in 21/22 (95 %) at last follow-up (1 patient was incidentally noted to have occlusion 31 months later). No immediate complications were observed.

CONCLUSION

Ablation efficacy was similar to the cited literature values for patients without TIPS. Furthermore, TIPS patency was preserved in the majority of cases. Patients with both portal hypertension and HCC are not uncommonly encountered, and a pre-existing TIPS does not appear to be a definite contraindication for RF ablation.

Efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS) in 40 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) are major complications of advanced liver cirrhosis. Thus, patients are often affected by both complications. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS) is an effective treatment for portal hypertension and its complications. However, no established guidelines for the treatment of symptomatic portal hypertension in HCC patients are currently available. In addition, only limited information exists about the consequence of TIPSS implantation in patients with HCC.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy, safety and overall survival in HCC patients who underwent TIPSS implantation.

METHODS

Forty HCC patients with portal hypertension who were treated with TIPSS between 1995 and 2012 were included in the analysis. Medical records and imaging studies were analysed. The indication for TIPSS implantation, procedure-related complications, treatment success and overall survival were assessed.

RESULTS

TIPSS implantation was performed in 23 patients (57.5%) due to treatment refractory ascites, in 14 patients (35.0%) due to recurrent variceal bleeding and in three patients (7.5%) due to ascites and variceal bleeding. Primary technical success was assessed in all patients. After TIPSS implantation, no variceal bleeding reoccurred and ascites was controlled in 74.1%. No severe procedure-related complications and no deterioration of liver function were observed. Post-TIPSS hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 40.0% of all patients. 30-day, 90-day-, 1-year- and 5-year survival rates were 97.5%, 75.0%, 42.5% and 7.5%, respectively. Median overall survival after TIPSS implantation was 180 days.

CONCLUSION

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt implantation is an effective and safe treatment for portal hypertension in patients with HCC.

Outcomes of Locoregional Tumor Therapy for Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts

PURPOSE

Locoregional therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be challenging in patients with a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). This study compares safety and imaging response of ablation, chemoembolization, radioembolization, and supportive care in patients with both TIPS and HCC.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 48 patients who had both a TIPS and a diagnosis of HCC. Twenty-nine of 48 (60%) underwent treatment for HCC, and 19/48 (40%) received best supportive care (i.e., symptomatic management only). While etiology of cirrhosis and indication for TIPS were similar between the two groups, treated patients had better baseline liver function (34 vs. 67% Child-Pugh class C). Tumor characteristics were similar between the two groups. A total of 39 ablations, 17 chemoembolizations, and 10 yttrium-90 radioembolizations were performed on 29 patients.

RESULTS

Ablation procedures resulted in low rates of hepatotoxicity and clinical toxicity. Post-embolization/ablation syndrome occurred more frequently in patients undergoing chemoembolization than ablation (47 vs. 15%). Significant hepatic dysfunction occurred more frequently in the chemoembolization group than the ablation group. Follow-up imaging response showed objective response in 100% of ablation procedures, 67% of radioembolization procedures, and 50% of chemoembolization procedures (p = 0.001). When censored for OLT, patients undergoing treatment survived longer than patients receiving supportive care (2273 v. 439 days, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Ablation appears to be safe and efficacious for HCC in patients with TIPS. Catheter-based approaches are associated with potential increased toxicity in this patient population. Chemoembolization appears to be associated with increased toxicity compared to radioembolization.

Transarterial chemoembolization vs. radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of single hepatocellular carcinoma 2 cm or smaller

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for treating small (≤2 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs).

METHODS

This retrospective study consisted of 287 patients (mean age, 57.1 years; age range, 29-84 years; 221 men, 66 women; 73.5% with HBV; 100% with liver cirrhosis) with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer very early-stage HCC (≤2 cm single HCC) who were initially treated with TACE (n=122) or RFA (n=165). The primary study end point was overall patient survival. Secondary study end points were time to progression and tumor response.

RESULTS

The RFA and TACE groups were well balanced in terms of baseline variables. The two groups did not differ significantly in overall survival (P=0.079) or major complication (P>0.999) rates. The respective cumulative survival rates at 1, 3, 5, and 8 years were 97.6, 86.7, 74.5, and 60.0% for RFA and 93.4, 75.4, 63.1, and 51.1% for TACE. Their objective tumor regression (complete or partial response) rates were 100% (165/165) and 95.9% (117/122), respectively (P=0.013). The median times to progression for RFA and TACE were 27.0±3.8 (95% confidence intervals (CIs): 19.6-34.4) and 18.0±2.9 (95% CIs: 12.2-23.8) months, respectively. RFA yielded a significantly longer time to progression (P=0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

TACE may be a viable alternative treatment for ≤2 cm HCCs when RFA is not feasible.

Efficacy of TACE in TIPS patients: comparison of treatment response to chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with and without a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

PURPOSE

To compare treatment response after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with and without a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent conventional TACE for HCC between January 2005 and December 2009 identified 10 patients with patent TIPS. From the same time period, 23 patients without TIPS were selected to control for comparable Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and Child-Pugh-Turcotte scores. The two groups showed similar distribution of Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer and United Network of Organ Sharing stages. Target HCC lesions were evaluated according to the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (mRECIST) guidelines. Transplantation rate, time to tumor progression, and overall survival (OS) were documented.

RESULTS

After TACE, the rate of complete response was significantly greater in non-TIPS patients compared with TIPS patients (74 vs. 30 %, p = 0.03). Objective response rate (complete and partial response) trended greater in the non-TIPS group (83 vs. 50 %, p = 0.09). The liver transplantation rate was 80 and 74 % in the TIPS and non-TIPS groups, respectively (p = 1.0). Time to tumor progression was similar (p = 0.47) between the two groups. OS favored the non-TIPS group (p = 0.01) when censored for liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

TACE is less effective in achieving complete or partial response using mRECIST criteria in TIPS patients compared with those without a TIPS. Nevertheless, similar clinical outcomes may be achieved, particularly in TIPS patients who are liver-transplantation candidates.

Yttrium-90 radioembolization for the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts

PURPOSE

To evaluate the toxicity and response to radioembolization with yttrium-90 ((90)Y) glass microspheres in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and existing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For treatment of unresectable HCC, 12 patients with a patent TIPS underwent a total of 21 infusions of (90)Y. Toxicity within 90 days of treatment was assessed according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE v4.0). Imaging response within the index lesion was assessed using the World Health Organization (WHO) and European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) guidelines. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

All patients had a patent TIPS on imaging before treatment. Clinical toxicities included fatigue (83%), encephalopathy (33%), and abdominal pain (25%). Three patients (25%) experienced new grade 3 or 4 bilirubin toxicity. Imaging response was achieved in 50% and 67% of patients according to WHO and EASL criteria. Six patients (50%) went on to liver transplantation. Median survival censored for liver transplantation was 498 days (95% confidence interval [CI],100-800 d), and uncensored median survival was 827 days (95% CI, 250-2,400 d).

CONCLUSIONS

(90)Y radioembolization may be a safe and effective treatment for patients with unresectable HCC and existing TIPS. This minimally embolic therapy may be particularly useful as a bridge to curative liver transplantation.

Hepatotoxicity after transarterial chemoembolization and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: do two rights make a wrong?

PURPOSE

To compare the rates of hepatotoxicity after transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with and without a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) who were stratified into comparable risk groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with HCC who were treated with transarterial chemoembolization between January 2005 and December 2009 was performed. Of 158 patients with comparable model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores, 10 had a patent TIPS. Hepatobiliary severe adverse events (SAEs) occurring after transarterial chemoembolization were documented. In addition, 1-year survival and liver transplantation rate after transarterial chemoembolization were calculated in each group.

RESULTS

The incidence of hepatobiliary SAEs after transarterial chemoembolization was nearly two times higher in patients with a TIPS (70%) than in patients without a TIPS (36%; P=.046). The liver transplantation rate 1 year after transarterial chemoembolization was 2.5 times higher in patients with a TIPS (80%) than in patients without a TIPS (32%; P=.004). There was no significant difference in 1-year survival between the two groups after transarterial chemoembolization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HCC and a patent TIPS are more likely to develop significant hepatotoxicity after transarterial chemoembolization than comparable patients without a TIPS in place.