Efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation versus minimally invasive liver surgery for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Mou-Bo Si,Pei-Jing Yan,Xiang-Yong Hao,Zhen-Ying Du,Hong-Wei Tian,Jia Yang,Cai-Wen Han,Ke-Hu Yang,Tian-Kang Guo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06784-0
2019-04-11
Surgical Endoscopy
Abstract:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with minimally invasive liver surgery (MIS) in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma (SHCC) and to assess short-term and long-term clinical outcomes.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of science, and CBM were systematically searched for articles from inception to July 2018, comparing RFA and MIS in SHCC treatment. We evaluated overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence, and complication rates, as well as hospitalization duration and operation times.ResultsSix retrospective studies were analyzed, including a total of 597 patients, 313 treated with RFA and 284 treated with MIS. OS rates were significantly higher in patients treated with MIS at 3 years, when compared to RFA (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.84). The 3-year DFS MIS rates were also superior to RFA (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.98). In contrast, when compared to MIS, RFA demonstrated a significantly higher rate of local intrahepatic recurrences, (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.47 to 3.42), and a lower incidence of postoperative complications (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.53), as well as shorter operation times (OR − 145.31, 95% CI − 200.24 to − 90.38) and hospitalization duration (OR − 4.02,95% CI − 4.94 to − 3.10).ConclusionsWe found that MIS led to higher OS, DFS, and lower local recurrences in SHCC patients. Meanwhile, RFA treatments led to significantly lower complication rates, shorter operation times, and hospitalization duration. Considering long-term outcomes, MIS was found to be superior to RFA. However, RFA may be an alternative treatment for patients presenting a single SHCC nodule (≤ 3 cm), given its minimally invasive nature and its comparable long-term efficacy with MIS. Nevertheless, our findings should be explained with caution due to the low level of evidence obtained.