High-intensity focused ultrasound versus transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis
Yun-Bing Wang,Hou-Shuai Zeng,Haitham Salameen,Chun-Mu Miao,Long Chen,Xiong Ding
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2023.2232009
Abstract:Purpose: The application of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was promising. However, whether the effect of HIFU is comparable with that of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) has not been determined. Materials and methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, WanFang Data, CqVip, CNKI, and CBM databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies. The methodological quality of each study was evaluated. When there is no statistical heterogeneity, the fixed effect model would be used to merge data. Otherwise, the random effect model would be utilized. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by excluding one study each time. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on age, sex, tumor number, relative number of the patients with Child-Pugh C grade in each group, the percentage of patients with Child-Pugh C grade in the whole study, and tumor load. Publication bias was evaluated by Egger's test and Begg's test. Results: Six cohort studies including 188 patients from HIFU group and 224 patients from TACE group were obtained for further analysis. The meta-analysis suggested HIFU and TACE showed no differences in postoperative 1-year overall survival (OS) rate, tumor response (including complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease), and postoperative complications. Moreover, compared with TACE, HIFU showed higher postoperative 6-month and 2-year OS rates. Subgroup analyses, meta regression analysis and sensitivity analyses indicated the findings above were reliable. Additionally, no potential publication bias was detected. Conclusion: For HCC, when compared with TACE, HIFU might show comparable safety but better effect. Considering the limitations of current studies, more well-designed studies are needed to validate our conclusion.