Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2022  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 329-335

Comparison of percutaneous microwave ablation with radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma adjacent to major vessels: A retrospective study


1 Department of Ultrasonic Intervention, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Naval Medical University, Changhai Rd, Shanghai, China
2 Department of Ultrasonography, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Naval Medical University, Changhai Rd, Shanghai, China

Correspondence Address:
Guo-jun Qian
Department of Ultrasonic Intervention, Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital, Naval Medical University, Changhai Rd 225, Shanghai
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1466_21

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: To compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety of percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) with those of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) adjacent to major vessels. Methods: From January 2010 to April 2011, 78 patients with a single nodule, no >5 cm, adjacent to major vessels were enrolled in this study. Forty-four patients (forty-one men, three women; age range, 33–72 years) treated by MWA were compared with thirty-four patients (thirty-one men, three women; age range, 33–75 years) treated by RFA. Local tumor progression rate, overall survival rate, and disease-free survival rate were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and differences between groups were estimated by log-rank test. Results: No death related to treatment occurred in the two groups. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year local tumor progression rates were 6.8%, 11.4%, and 15.9%, respectively, in the microwave group versus 17.6%, 20.6%, and 20.6%, respectively in the radiofrequency group (P = 0.544). The rates of major complications associated with microwave and RFA were 2.3% (1/44) versus 0% (0/34; P = 0.376). The microwave group's 1-, 2-, and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 72.7%, 65.9%, and 51.8%, respectively, and those in the radiofrequency were 58.8%, 52.9%, and 47.1%, respectively (P = 0.471). The microwave group's 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival rates were 93.2%, 90.9%, and 83.6%, respectively, and those in the radiofrequency group were 91.2%, 88.2%, and 82.4%, respectively (P = 0.808) There was no significant difference in local tumor progression, complications related to treatment, and long-term results between the two modalities. The incidence of peritumoral structure damage on image scan was significantly higher in the microwave group than in the RFA group (P = 0.025). Conclusions: Both RFA and MWA are safe and effective techniques for HCC adjacent to major vessels and have the same clinical value.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed934    
    Printed56    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded245    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal