Comparison of Microwave Ablation and Transarterial Chemoembolization for Single-Nodule Hepatocellular Carcinoma Smaller Than 5cm: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Clinical effectiveness of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization sequential microwave ablation for lack of blood supply in hepatocellular carcinoma

Aims: To determine the effectiveness and safety of sequential computed tomography-guided percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hypovascular liver lesions <5 cm in size. Methods: The clinical data of 69 hypovascular hepatocellular carcinoma lesions <5 cm in 60 patients treated with TACE followed by MWA were retrospectively analyzed. Results: There was no significant difference in AFP levels among AFP-positive patients before and after TACE (p = 0.515), but levels were significantly lower 1 month after MWA than before MWA (p = 0.039). Compared with 1 month after TACE, the objective response rate (p < 0.001) and disease control rate (p = 0.004) were increased 1 month after MWA. Any adverse events were well tolerated, and the albumin bilirubin score did not deteriorate within 4 weeks. Conclusion: Sequential MWA after TACE was found to be safe and effective for treating hypovascular hepatocellular carcinoma for lesions <5 cm in size.

Recurrence Outcome in Hepatocellular Carcinoma within Milan Criteria Undergoing Microwave Ablation with or without Transarterial Chemoembolization

Background and Objectives: The recurrence outcome in patients who underwent microwave ablation (MWA) with or without transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within Milan criteria remains unclear. The aim of this retrospective study was to identify the predictive factors of recurrence in these patients. Materials and Methods: From May 2018 to April 2021, 66 patients with HCC within Milan criteria were enrolled. Local tumor progression (LTP) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were evaluated. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the risk factors of recurrence. The propensity score analysis was conducted to reduce potential confounding bias. Results: During the median follow-up of 25.07 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.85, 28.28), the median time to LTP and RFS were 20.10 (95%CI, 14.67, 25.53) and 13.03 (95%CI, 6.36, 19.70) months. No group difference (MWA vs. MWA + TACE) was found in 1-year cumulative LTP (p = 0.575) and RFS (p = 0.515), but meaningful significant differences were found in two-year recurrence (LTP, p = 0.007 and RFS, p = 0.037). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that treatment received before ablation was an independent risk factor of LTP (hazard ratio [HR] 4.37, 95%CI, 1.44, 13.32) and RFS (HR 3.41, 95%CI, 1.49, 7.81). Conclusions: The LTP and RFS in the MWA group were similar to that in the MWA combined with TACE. For HCC within Milan criteria, both groups preferentially selected MWA. More endeavor and rigorous surveillance should be taken to relapse prevention, in patients who have received previous treatment.

Percutaneous microwave ablation versus robot-assisted hepatectomy for early hepatocellular carcinoma: A real-world single-center study

BACKGROUND

Both microwave ablation and robot-assisted hepatectomy are representative minimally invasive treatments for early hepatocellular carcinoma. Our study compares the practicability and medium-term therapeutic efficacy between them.

METHODS

Patients with early HCC treated by MWA or RH from 2013 to 2019 were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weight (IPTW) were used to minimize baseline imbalance. Operation trauma, postoperative recovery, complications, cost and oncological efficacy were compared.

RESULTS

401 patients with a median follow-up of 28 months were included (MWA n = 240; RH n = 161). After PSM, 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) of MWA group and RH group were 52.2% vs 65.8%, 91.5% vs 91.3% and 91.5% vs 91.3%, respectively. OS and CSS were comparable (p = 0.44 and 0.96), while RFS of MWA was slightly lower but not significant (p = 0.097). The above results after IPTW followed the same trend. After PSM, MWA showed advantages in operation time and blood loss, while RH performed better in postoperative liver function. There was no significant difference in incidence of severe complications between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For early HCC parents, both treatments can achieve good, safe and comparable medium-term therapeutic effects. MWA is more minimally invasive, while RH has better accuracy and causes less damage to liver parenchyma.

Hyperthermia ablation combined with transarterial chemoembolization versus monotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The existing evidence has indicated that hyperthermia ablation (HA) and HA combined with transarterial chemoembolization (HATACE) are the optimal alternative to surgical resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the COVID-19 crisis. However, the evidence for decision-making is lacking in terms of comparison between HA and HATACE. Herein, a comprehensive evaluation was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of HATACE with monotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Worldwide studies were collected to evaluate the HATACE regimen for HCC due to the practical need for global extrapolation of applicative population. Meta-analyses were performed using the RevMan 5.3 software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies involving a large sample of 5036 patients were included finally. Compared with HA alone, HATACE produced the advantage of 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (OR:1.90; 95%CI:1.46,2.46; p < 0.05) without increasing toxicity (p ≥ 0.05). Compared with TACE alone, HATACE was associated with superior 5-year OS rate (OR:3.54; 95%CI:1.96,6.37; p < 0.05) and significantly reduced the incidences of severe liver damage (OR:0.32; 95%CI:0.11,0.96; p < 0.05) and ascites (OR:0.42; 95%CI:0.20,0.88; p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis results of small (≤3 cm) HCC revealed that there were no significant differences between the HATACE group and HA monotherapy group in regard to the OS rates (p ≥ 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with TACE alone, HATACE was more effective and safe for HCC. Compared with HA alone, HATACE was more effective for non-small-sized (>3 cm) HCC with comparable safety. However, the survival benefit of adjuvant TACE in HATACE regimen was not found for the patients with small (≤3 cm) HCC.