4.6 Article

Radiofrequency ablation versus stereotactic body radiation therapy for small (≤ 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective comparison analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
卷 36, 期 7, 页码 1962-1970

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jgh.15442

关键词

hepatocellular carcinoma; local control rates; radiofrequency ablation; stereotactic body radiation therapy; survival rates

资金

  1. Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea [2020IE0015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compared the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in small hepatocellular carcinoma patients, finding comparable results in terms of local control rates, overall survival rates, and intrahepatic recurrence-free survival rates. SBRT appears to be a viable alternative method for small hepatocellular carcinomas that are not suitable for RFA due to tumor location.
Background and Aim We compared the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in small (<= 3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods A total of 266 patients treated with RFA (n = 179) or SBRT (n = 87) were reviewed. Local control rates (LCRs), intrahepatic recurrence-free survival (IHRFS) rates, and overall survival (OS) rates were compared. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Results The median follow-up period was 50.3 months, and treatment method (RFA vs SBRT) was not a significant prognostic factor for LCR, OS, and IHRFS in both multivariate and IPTW-adjusted analyses. The 4-year LCRs after RFA and SBRT were 92.7% and 95.0%, respectively. Perivascular location was a significant prognostic factor for LCR in the entire patients and in the RFA group, but not in the SBRT group. The 4-year OS rates in the RFA and SBRT groups were 78.1% and 64.1%, respectively (P = 0.012). After IPTW adjustment, the 4-year LCRs (90.6% vs 96.3%) and OS rates (71.8% vs 70.2%) were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of grade >= 3 adverse events was 0.6% (n = 1) in the RFA group and 1.1% (n = 1) in the SBRT group. Conclusions The two treatment methods showed comparable outcomes in terms of LCR, OS rate, and IHRFS rate after IPTW adjustment. SBRT seems to be a viable alternative method for small hepatocellular carcinomas that are not suitable for RFA due to tumor location.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据