Comparison of Hepatic Resection and Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Ablative techniques in colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review, descriptive summary of practice, and recommendations for optimal data reporting

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) and Microwave Ablation (MWA) are alternative treatments for colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) patients that are unsuitable for resection. However, consensus is lacking regarding selection criteria, tumour characteristics, ablation technique delivery, and device settings. This study aims to summarise current evidence to inform future prospective studies.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Studies assessing RFA and MWA treatment of CRLM were identified in Medline, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews, from inception until 31st August 2024.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies were included (retrospective cohort n = 45, prospective cohort n = 5, non-randomized comparative studies n = 2). Fifty-four inclusion criteria were used across 45 studies and were not stated in 7 studies. Tumours varied in mean number [1-8] and diameter (1.54-4.35 cm). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use (10-100 % of patients), ablation delivery approach (open n = 4, laparoscopic n = 11, percutaneous n = 26, mixed n = 5), anaesthetic mode (GA n = 18, LA n = 11, mixed n = 2) and delivering clinician (radiologist n = 11, surgeon n = 16, both n = 1) all varied. Thirty-two studies lacked complete ablation device settings. Six studies followed a standardized ablation algorithm and 14 studies had specific settings. Five-year survival ranged from 0 to 69.7 % for ablation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant heterogeneity in the reporting of study design, patient selection, and ablation techniques for CRLM. The lack of standardized approaches and inconsistent reporting of methodology and outcomes make it challenging to determine the optimal ablative treatment for CRLM. We recommend that future research should focus on clearly defining selection and treatment criteria, as well as treatment delivery.

Effects of stereotactic body radiotherapy for clinical outcomes of patients with liver metastasis and hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective study

This retrospective clinical study described the treatment efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) for patients of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver metastasis tumors. The therapeutic effect and prognosis of patients with liver cancer treated with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) at the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Shanghai, China) between July 2011 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival (OS), local control (LC) rates and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test. Local progression was defined as tumor growth after SBRT on dynamic computed tomography follow-up. Treatment-related toxicities were assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. A total of 36 patients with liver cancer were enrolled in the present study. The prescribed dosages (14 Gy in 3 fractions or 16 Gy in 3 fractions) were applied for SBRT treatments. The median follow-up time was 21.4 months. The median OS time was 20.4 [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.6-34.2] months, and the 2-year OS rates for the total population, HCC group and liver metastasis group were 47.5, 73.3 and 34.2%, respectively. The median PFS time was 17.3 (95% CI: 11.8-22.8) months and the 2-year PFS rates for the total population, HCC group and liver metastasis group were 36.3, 44.0 and 31.4%, respectively. The 2-year LC rates for the total population, HCC group and liver metastasis group were 83.4, 85.7 and 81.6%, respectively. The most common grade IV toxicity for the HCC group was liver function impairment (15.4%), followed by thrombocytopenia (7.7%). There were no grade III/IV radiation pneumonia or digestive discomfort. The present study aimed to explore a safe, effective and non-invasive treatment method for liver tumors. At the same time, the innovation of the present study is to find a safe and effective prescription dose of SBRT in the absence of consensus on guidelines.

Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases considering Infectious Complications: Simultaneous or Delayed Surgery?

Background

Simultaneous or delayed surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases is performed in the clinic; which method is better is still up for debate. In particular, infectious complications are rarely compared. This study aims to investigate the differences between simultaneous and delayed surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases by comparing infectious complications and prognosis.

Methods

Firstly, the patients' information from a single institution's database was retrospectively analyzed. Then the patients were divided into a simultaneous group and a delayed group according to synchronous colorectal liver metastases. Analyzing the postoperative complications within 30 days, the progression-free survival, and the overall survival in the two groups.

Results

The simultaneous group had a higher neo-adjuvant chemotherapy rate (42.0% VS. 16.0% in the delayed group, P < 0.05) and laparoscopic surgery rate (89.8% VS. 72.0% in the delayed group, P < 0.05) than the delayed group. Moreover, the simultaneous group had a higher liver-related infection rate (17.0 VS. 0.0% in the delayed group, P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Although there was no difference in survival rate between delayed and simultaneous surgeries, the delayed surgery have fewer liver-related infections compared with the simultaneous surgery in synchronous colorectal liver metastases patients. Delayed surgery could be a better treatment method for synchronous colorectal liver metastases patients.

Recurrence and survival following microwave, radiofrequency ablation, and hepatic resection of colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gold standard for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains hepatic resection (HR). However, patients with severe comorbidities, unresectable or deep-situated resectable CRLM are candidates for ablation. The aim of the study was to compare recurrence rate and survival benefit of the microwave ablation (MWA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and HR by conducting the first network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic search of the literature was conducted in the electronic databases. Both updated traditional and network meta-analyses were conducted and the results were compared between them.

RESULTS

HR cohort demonstrated significantly less local recurrence rate and better 3- and 5-year disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to MWA and RFA cohorts. HR cohort included significantly younger patients and with significantly lower preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) by 10.28 ng/mL compared to RFA cohort. Subgroup analysis of local recurrence and OS of solitary and ≤ 3 cm CRLMs did not demonstrate any discrepancies when compared with the whole sample.

CONCLUSIONS

For resectable CRLM the treatment of choice still remains HR. MWA and RFA can be used as a single or adjunct treatment in patients with unresectable CRLM and/or prohibitive comorbidities.

Clinical analysis of ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation for recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy

Background

RFA is designed to produce localized tumor destruction by heating the tumor and surrounding liver tissue, especially suitable for patients who do not qualify for hepatic resection. Many studies have reported that RFA was inferior to hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent colorectal liver metastases. However, strong evidence is lacking in the literature. This study aimed to investigate the effect and clinical outcome of percutaneous ultrasound-guided RFA and repeat hepatic resection for recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy.

Methods

From January 2007 to January 2014, 194 patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy diagnosed in our hospital was performed, and then divided into two groups based on different regimens: repeat hepatic resection group and RFA group. The clinical data of the two groups were analyzed. After treatment, the liver function-related indexes, complication rate, survival rate, and tumor recurrence of the two groups were recorded. The difference in short-term and long-term effects between repeat hepatic resection and RFA was identified by propensity score analysis.

Results

The number of metastases and the proportion of left and right lobe involved by tumor and preoperative chemotherapy in the RFA group were higher than those in the repeat hepatic resection group. The clinical data showed no significant difference between the two groups after using propensity score analysis. Compared with the RFA group, the liver function of the repeat hepatic resection group was significantly improved. After adjustment for potential confounders, no significant difference in liver function-related indexes was found between RFA and repeat hepatic resection, and the incidence of complications in the RFA group was lower. In survival analysis, there was no significant difference in OS and DFS between the two groups.

Conclusions

RFA is a safe and effective therapeutic option for patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy.

Ablation or Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases? A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background: Successful use of ablation for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) has led to interest in the role of ablation for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). However, there remains a lack of clarity about the use of ablation for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), specifically its efficacy compared with hepatic resection. Methods: A systematic review of the literature on ablation or resection of colorectal liver metastases was performed using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase until December 2018. The aim of this study was to summarize the evidence for ablation vs. resection in the treatment of CRLM. Results: This review identified 1,773 studies of which 18 were eligible for inclusion. In the majority of the studies, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were significantly higher and local recurrence (LR) rates were significantly lower in the resection groups. On subgroup analysis of solitary CRLM, resection was associated with improved OS, DFS, and reduced LR. Three series assessed the outcome of resection vs. ablation for technically resectable CRLM, and showed improved outcome in the resection group. In fact, there were no studies showing a survival advantage of ablation compared to resection in the treatment of CRLM. Conclusions: Resection remains the "gold standard" in the treatment of CRLM and should not be replaced by ablation at present. This review supports the use of ablation only as an adjunct to resection and as a single treatment option when resection is not safely possible.