Introduction: The aim of this multicenter comparison of balloon-occluded transarterial chemoembolization (B-TACE) versus conventional TACE (cTACE) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was to assess in which size range the 2 techniques offered higher complete response (CR) and objective response (OR) rates in a single session, and to evaluate the possibility of using B-TACE to reduce the need for re-treatment. Methods: 325 patients were retrospectively evaluated: 91 patients in the B-TACE group (22 with cTACE [B-cTACE] and 69 with drug-eluting microsphere TACE [B-DEM-TACE]) and 234 in the cTACE group. The results were compared according to tumor size: (A) <30 mm, (B) 30-50 mm, and (C) >50 mm; OR and CR rates after the first session and the number of TACE re-interventions within a 6-month period were also evaluated using propensity score matching (PSM). Results: The best target ORs were very high (93.2%) and similar between the 2 treatments both before (94.4% for cTACE and 90.1% for B-TACE) and after PSM (94.5% for cTACE and 90.1%; p = 0.405), with slightly better results for the cTACE cohort probably due to better cTACE effectiveness in smaller lesions. In lesions <30 mm, cTACE obtained a slightly higher CR rate than B-TACE (61.9 vs. 56.3%, p = 0.680), whereas in intermediate-sized HCCs (30-50 mm), B-TACE showed a significant superiority in achieving a CR (72.3 vs. 54.1%, respectively; p = 0.047). In larger lesions (>50 mm), cTACE and B-TACE performed equally, with a poor CR rate (22.6 vs. 23.1%, respectively; p = 1.000). These results were additionally confirmed using PSM. The patients treated with B-TACE had a significantly lower re-treatment rate than the cTACE cohort (12.1 vs. 26.9%, respectively; p = 0.005). B-cTACE and B-DEM-TACE demonstrated similar ORs, with a slightly better CR rate for B-cTACE (68.2 vs. 56.5%, respectively; p = 0.456). Conclusion: In HCCs of 30-50 mm, B-TACE should be preferred to cTACE, whereas in smaller nodules (<30 mm), cTACE can suffice in achieving a good CR rate. The statistically significant lower re-treatment rate of the B-TACE cohort after a single procedure reduced the risk of complications due to multiple TACE, which could worsen the patient prognosis.

Golfieri R., Bezzi M., Verset G., Fucilli F., Mosconi C., Cappelli A., et al. (2021). Balloon-occluded transarterial chemoembolization: In which size range does it perform best? A comparison of its efficacy versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization, using propensity score matching. LIVER CANCER, 10(5), 522-534 [10.1159/000516613].

Balloon-occluded transarterial chemoembolization: In which size range does it perform best? A comparison of its efficacy versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization, using propensity score matching

Golfieri R.
Primo
;
Mosconi C.;Paccapelo A.;
2021

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this multicenter comparison of balloon-occluded transarterial chemoembolization (B-TACE) versus conventional TACE (cTACE) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was to assess in which size range the 2 techniques offered higher complete response (CR) and objective response (OR) rates in a single session, and to evaluate the possibility of using B-TACE to reduce the need for re-treatment. Methods: 325 patients were retrospectively evaluated: 91 patients in the B-TACE group (22 with cTACE [B-cTACE] and 69 with drug-eluting microsphere TACE [B-DEM-TACE]) and 234 in the cTACE group. The results were compared according to tumor size: (A) <30 mm, (B) 30-50 mm, and (C) >50 mm; OR and CR rates after the first session and the number of TACE re-interventions within a 6-month period were also evaluated using propensity score matching (PSM). Results: The best target ORs were very high (93.2%) and similar between the 2 treatments both before (94.4% for cTACE and 90.1% for B-TACE) and after PSM (94.5% for cTACE and 90.1%; p = 0.405), with slightly better results for the cTACE cohort probably due to better cTACE effectiveness in smaller lesions. In lesions <30 mm, cTACE obtained a slightly higher CR rate than B-TACE (61.9 vs. 56.3%, p = 0.680), whereas in intermediate-sized HCCs (30-50 mm), B-TACE showed a significant superiority in achieving a CR (72.3 vs. 54.1%, respectively; p = 0.047). In larger lesions (>50 mm), cTACE and B-TACE performed equally, with a poor CR rate (22.6 vs. 23.1%, respectively; p = 1.000). These results were additionally confirmed using PSM. The patients treated with B-TACE had a significantly lower re-treatment rate than the cTACE cohort (12.1 vs. 26.9%, respectively; p = 0.005). B-cTACE and B-DEM-TACE demonstrated similar ORs, with a slightly better CR rate for B-cTACE (68.2 vs. 56.5%, respectively; p = 0.456). Conclusion: In HCCs of 30-50 mm, B-TACE should be preferred to cTACE, whereas in smaller nodules (<30 mm), cTACE can suffice in achieving a good CR rate. The statistically significant lower re-treatment rate of the B-TACE cohort after a single procedure reduced the risk of complications due to multiple TACE, which could worsen the patient prognosis.
2021
Golfieri R., Bezzi M., Verset G., Fucilli F., Mosconi C., Cappelli A., et al. (2021). Balloon-occluded transarterial chemoembolization: In which size range does it perform best? A comparison of its efficacy versus conventional transarterial chemoembolization, using propensity score matching. LIVER CANCER, 10(5), 522-534 [10.1159/000516613].
Golfieri R.; Bezzi M.; Verset G.; Fucilli F.; Mosconi C.; Cappelli A.; Paccapelo A.; Lucatelli P.; Magand N.; Rode A.; De Baere T.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
21.Golfieri-Balloon-Occluded.pdf

accesso aperto

Descrizione: Articolo in rivista
Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale (CCBYNC)
Dimensione 471.13 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
471.13 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/854026
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 11
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 13
social impact