Liver resection had better disease-free survival rates compared with radiofrequency ablation in hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis based on randomized clinical trials

Yee-Hui Yeo,Yi-No Kang,Chiehfeng Chen,Teng-Yu Lee,Chun-Chieh Yeh,Tsai-Wei Huang,Chun-Ying Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000001943

2024-07-17

Abstract:Background: Liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are the most commonly used treatment modalities for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (ES-HCC). The comparative efficacy of LR and RFA in ES-HCC remains debated. We conducted a meta-analysis based on randomized trials to compare the outcomes of LR and RFA. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RFA and LR interventions for the treatment of ES-HCC. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). We used meta-regression to determine the source of heterogeneity and conducted a trial sequential analysis to examine whether the outcome was statistically reliable. Results: Our meta-analysis included nine RCTs with a total of 1,516 HCC patients. Compared with patients receiving RFA, those receiving LR did not have significantly different 2-year OS (HR=1.28, 95% CI: 0.73-2.23) and 5-year OS (HR=1.49, 95% CI: 0.99-2.24). However, patients receiving LR showed a favorable trend in 2-year DFS (HR=1.40, 95% CI: 1.16-1.69) and 5-year DFS (HR=1.37; 95% CI: 1.05-1.77), although these results are not conclusive due to underpowered significance. The heterogeneity was low, and the outcomes were statistically reliable. Discussion: Meta-analysis suggests that while LR shows a favorable trend in DFS compared to RFA for ES-HCC, the present evidence does not thoroughly support recommending LR over RFA. The inconclusive nature of these findings highlights the need for further large-scale RCTs to establish definitive comparative efficacy.