Background/Aim: While percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered the standard ablative modality for the treatment of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) is being increasingly used in recent years. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare percutaneous MWA versus percutaneous RFA in BCLC-A HCC across randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patients and Methods: Eligible studies included RCTs assessing MWA versus RFA in BCLC-A HCC. Outcomes of interest included: complete ablation (CA) rate, local recurrence (LR) rate, 1-year overall survival (OS) rate, 3-year OS rate and major complications rate. Results: We retrieved all the relevant RCTs through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library and EMBASE; five eligible studies involving a total of 794 patients (MWA: 409; RFA: 385) and 1008 nodules of HCC (MWA: 519; RFA: 489) were included in our analysis. No significant differences were found between MWA and RFA regarding CA, LR, 3-year OS and major complications rate. Regarding 1-year OS, a higher rate was observed in the MWA group. Conclusion: MWA and RFA are effective and safe techniques in early stage, BCLC-A, HCCMWA resulted in better 1-year OS, although this benefit was not confirmed in the 3-year analysis.

Ricci, A.D., Rizzo, A., Bonucci, C., Tavolari, S., Palloni, A., Frega, G., et al. (2020). The (Eternal) Debate on Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in BCLC-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma. IN VIVO, 34(6), 3421-3429 [10.21873/invivo.12181].

The (Eternal) Debate on Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in BCLC-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Ricci A. D.;Bonucci C.;Tavolari S.;Palloni A.;Frega G.;Mollica V.;Tober N.;Felicani C.;Brandi G.
2020

Abstract

Background/Aim: While percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered the standard ablative modality for the treatment of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) is being increasingly used in recent years. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare percutaneous MWA versus percutaneous RFA in BCLC-A HCC across randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patients and Methods: Eligible studies included RCTs assessing MWA versus RFA in BCLC-A HCC. Outcomes of interest included: complete ablation (CA) rate, local recurrence (LR) rate, 1-year overall survival (OS) rate, 3-year OS rate and major complications rate. Results: We retrieved all the relevant RCTs through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library and EMBASE; five eligible studies involving a total of 794 patients (MWA: 409; RFA: 385) and 1008 nodules of HCC (MWA: 519; RFA: 489) were included in our analysis. No significant differences were found between MWA and RFA regarding CA, LR, 3-year OS and major complications rate. Regarding 1-year OS, a higher rate was observed in the MWA group. Conclusion: MWA and RFA are effective and safe techniques in early stage, BCLC-A, HCCMWA resulted in better 1-year OS, although this benefit was not confirmed in the 3-year analysis.
2020
Ricci, A.D., Rizzo, A., Bonucci, C., Tavolari, S., Palloni, A., Frega, G., et al. (2020). The (Eternal) Debate on Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in BCLC-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma. IN VIVO, 34(6), 3421-3429 [10.21873/invivo.12181].
Ricci, A. D.; Rizzo, A.; Bonucci, C.; Tavolari, S.; Palloni, A.; Frega, G.; Mollica, V.; Tober, N.; Mazzotta, E.; Felicani, C.; Serra, C.; Brandi, G....espandi
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

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/11585/876040
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 16
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 15
social impact