4.6 Article

Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Ethanol Injection with or without Combined Radiofrequency Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinomas in High Risk Locations

Journal

KOREAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 240-247

Publisher

KOREAN RADIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2013.14.2.240

Keywords

Radiofrequency ablation; Percutaneous ethanol injection; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Liver imaging; Complication

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) alone and combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in high risk locations. Materials and Methods: We performed PEI for HCCs in RFA-high risk Locations, either alone or in combination with RFA. There were 20 HCCs (1.7 +/- 0.9 cm) in 20 patients (PEI group: n = 12; PEI + RFA group: n = 8). We evaluated technical success, local tumor progression and complications in both groups. Results: Technical success was achieved in all HCCs in both groups. During follow-up, local tumor progression was found in 41.7% (5/12) in the PEI group, whereas 12.5% (1/8) for the PEI + RFA group (p = 0.32). Bile duct dilatation was the most common complication, especially when the tumors were in periportal locations; 55% (5/9) in the PEI group and 50% (2/4) in the PEI + RFA group (p = 1.00). One patient in the PEI group developed severe biliary stricture and upstream dilatation that resulted in atrophy of the left hepatic lobe. One patient treated with PEI + RFA developed cholangitis and an abscess. Conclusion: Combined PEI and RFA treatment has a tendency to be more effective than PEI alone for managing HCCs in high risk locations, although the difference is not statistically significant. Even though PEI is generally accepted as a safe procedure, it may cause major biliary complications for managing HCCs adjacent to the portal vein.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available