Treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma confined to the liver with repeated resection and radiofrequency ablation: a single center experience

Repeat hepatectomy versus thermal ablation therapy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the survival benefits of repeat hepatectomy (RH) and thermal ablation therapy (TAT) in managing recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted in the PubMed, SinoMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science databases using relevant keywords to identify all studies published on this specific topic. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a fixed-effects model.

Results

This meta-analysis included a total of 21 studies, comprising 2580 patients with recurrent HCC, among whom 1189 underwent RH and 1394 underwent TAT. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the RH group exhibited superior overall survival (OS) (HR=0.85, 95%CI 0.76∼0.95, P=0.004) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=0.79, 95%CI 0.7∼0.9, P<0.01) compared to the TAT group. Regarding postoperative complications, the TAT group experienced fewer complications than the RH group (OR=3.23, 95%CI 1.48∼7.07, P=0.003), while no significant difference in perioperative mortality was observed between the two groups (OR=2.11, 95%CI 0.54∼8.19, P=0.28).

Conclusion

The present study demonstrates that, in comparison to TAT, RH may confer superior survival benefits for patients with recurrent HCC.

Microwave Ablation of Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Curative Surgical Resection

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of microwave ablation (MWA) as a treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after initial successful surgical resection. Methods: This retrospective study included 40 patients (11 women and 29 men; mean age: 62.3 ± 11.7 years) with 48 recurrent lesions of HCC after initial surgical resection that were treated by percutaneous MWA. Several parameters including complications, technical success, local tumor progression (LTP), intrahepatic distant recurrence (IDR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated in order to investigate the safety and efficacy of MWA for these recurrent HCC lesions after surgical treatment. Results: All MWA treatments were performed without complications or procedure-related deaths. Technical success was achieved in all cases. Two cases developed LTP at a rate of 5%, and IDR occurred in 23 cases at a rate of 57.5% (23/40). The 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 6-year OS rates were 97%, 89.2%, 80.3%, 70.2%, and 60.2%, respectively. The 1- and 3-year PFS rates were 50.2% and 34.6%, respectively. Conclusion: MWA is effective and safe as a local treatment for recurrent HCC after initial surgical resection.

Network meta-analysis of the prognosis of curative treatment strategies for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) is a common outcome after curative treatment. Retreatment for rHCC is recommended, but no guidelines exist.

AIM

To compare curative treatments such as repeated hepatectomy (RH), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and liver transplantation (LT) for patients with rHCC after primary hepatectomy by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

From 2011 to 2021, 30 articles involving patients with rHCC after primary liver resection were retrieved for this NMA. The Q test was used to assess heterogeneity among studies, and Egger’s test was used to assess publication bias. The efficacy of rHCC treatment was assessed using disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

From 30 articles, a total of 17, 11, 8, and 12 arms of RH, RFA, TACE, and LT subgroups were collected for analysis. Forest plot analysis revealed that the LT subgroup had a better cumulative DFS and 1-year OS than the RH subgroup, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.96 (95%CI: 0.31-2.96). However, the RH subgroup had a better 3-year and 5-year OS compared to the LT, RFA, and TACE subgroups. Hierarchic step diagram of different subgroups measured by the Wald test yielded the same results as the forest plot analysis. LT had a better 1-year OS (OR: 1.04, 95%CI: 0.34-03.20), and LT was inferior to RH in 3-year OS (OR: 10.61, 95%CI: 0.21-1.73) and 5-year OS (OR: 0.95, 95%CI: 0.39-2.34). According to the predictive P score evaluation, the LT subgroup had a better DFS, and RH had the best OS. However, meta-regression analysis revealed that LT had a better DFS (P < 0.001) as well as 3-year OS (P = 0.881) and 5-year OS (P = 0.188). The differences in superiority between DFS and OS were due to the different testing methods used.

CONCLUSION

According to this NMA, RH and LT had better DFS and OS for rHCC than RFA and TACE. However, treatment strategies should be determined by the recurrent tumor characteristics, the patient’s general health status, and the care program at each institution.

Comparison of Surgical Resection and Percutaneous Ultrasonographic Guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Initial Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Early Stage following Curative Treatment

Background/Aim: The SURF trial showed that surgical resection (SR) and percutaneous ultrasonographic guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) had equal therapeutic effects for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, consensus regarding which treatment is appropriate for initial recurrent early-stage HCC remains lacking. This study aimed to elucidate therapeutic efficacy differences between SR and RFA for initial recurrent early-stage HCC. Materials/Methods: From 2000 to 2021, 371 patients with recurrent early-stage HCC (≤3 cm, ≤3 nodules) after undergoing initial curative treatment with SR or RFA were enrolled (median age 72 years; males 269; Child−Pugh A:B, n = 328:43; SR:RFA, n = 36:335). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Although the median albumin−bilirubin (ALBI) score was better in the SR than the RFA group (−2.90 vs. −2.50, p < 0.01), there were no significant differences between them in regard to RFS (median 28.1 months, 95% CI 23.4−50.0 vs. 22.1 months, 95% CI 19.3−26.2; p = 0.34), OS (78.9 months, 95% CI 49.3—not applicable vs. 71.2 months 95% CI, 61.8−84.7; p = 0.337), or complications (8.3% vs. 9.3%; p = 1.0). In sub-analysis for RFS and OS according to ALBI grade revealed no significant differences between the SR and RFA groups (ALBI 1/2 = 28.2/17.5 vs. 24.0/23.4 months; p = 0.881/0684 and ALBI 1/2 = 78.9/58.9 vs. 115.3/52.6 months, p = 0.651/0.578, respectively). Conclusion: This retrospective study found no significant differences in regard to RFS or OS between patients in the SR and the RFA groups for initial recurrence of early-stage HCC after undergoing curative treatment. These results showing equal therapeutic efficacy of SR and RFA confirm the findings of the SURF trial.

Meta-Analysis of Repeat Hepatectomy versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary hepatic malignancy and a leading cause of cancer-related death in both the developed and developing world. Recurrent HCC (rHCC) develops in a significant proportion of patients even following curative-intent resection. In the absence of a structured treatment algorithm, a number of treatment options including repeat hepatectomy (RH) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have been utilized in select patients with rHCC. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing RHR versus RFA for rHCC. Four electronic databases were screened until September 2022. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall and disease-free survival were comparable among the two groups. Patients undergoing RH were less likely to develop a second recurrence (RR 0.89, 95% C.I. 0.81 to 0.98, p = 0.02). Overall and major morbidity were significantly increased in the RH group (RR 3.01, 95% C.I. 1.98 to 4.56, p < 0.001 and RR 3.65, 95% C.I. 2.07 to 6.43, p < 0.001, respectively), while mortality was similar between RFA and RH. The data demonstrated that RFA is a safe and efficient alternative to RH for selected patients with rHCC. Nevertheless, despite higher morbidity associated with RH, repeat resection remains the preferred treatment option whenever feasible, as it allows for better local disease control.

The largest western experience on salvage hepatectomy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score-matched analysis on behalf of He.RC.O.Le.Study Group

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate, in a large Western cohort, perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes of salvage hepatectomy (SH) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after primary hepatectomy (PH) or locoregional treatments.

METHODS

Data were collected from the Hepatocarcinoma Recurrence on the Liver Study Group (He.RC.O.Le.S.) Italian Registry. After 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis (PSM), two groups were compared: the PH group (patients submitted to resection for a first HCC) and the SH group (patients resected for intrahepatic rHCC after previous HCC-related treatments).

RESULTS

2689 patients were enrolled. PH included 2339 patients, SH 350. After PSM, 263 patients were selected in each group with major resected nodule median size, intraoperative blood loss and minimally invasive approach significantly lower in the SH group. Long-term outcomes were compared, with no difference in OS and DFS. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed only microvascular invasion as an independent prognostic factor for OS.

CONCLUSION

SH proved to be equivalent to PH in terms of safety, feasibility and long-term outcomes, consistent with data gathered from East Asia. In the awaiting of reliable treatment-allocating algorithms for rHCC, SH appears to be a suitable alternative in patients fit for surgery, regardless of the previous therapeutic modality implemented.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of repeated hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of primary recurrent liver cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

Since there is still controversy about the comparison of the efficacy and safety of RH and RFA in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety, in order to provide evidence-based evidence for future research and clinical treatment.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from the establishment of the database to Feb 2021. We included studies that reported liver cancer patients underwent repeated hepatectomy (RH) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and we excluded duplicate publications, research without full text, incomplete information, or inability to conduct data extraction, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews. The STATA 15.1 was used to analyze the data.

Results

The pooled results show that the 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (odds ratio (OR) = 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.47–2.60, P ≤ 0.001; OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.12–2.43, P = 0.012). Similarly, the pooled results show that the 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.30–2.31, P ≤ 0.001; OR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.38–2.49, P ≤ 0.001). However, there is no significant difference in the 1-year OS and DFS rate of repeated hepatectomy group and radiofrequency ablation group. Additionally, the pooled results show that the postoperative Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade II or higher complication rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.37–5.75, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Based on the pooled results of 8 existing retrospective studies, RH has a higher OS rate and DFS rate in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, while the postoperative complication rate of RFA is lower. When survival is the primary goal, RH should be the first choice for recurrent liver cancer.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02649-4.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

The efficacy of repeat hepatic resection (rHR) in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma compared with radiofrequency or microwave ablation after resection of the primary tumour remains controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the safety and efficacy of these procedures.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were systematically searched to identify related studies published before 10 October 2021. Overall and recurrence-free survival after different treatments were compared based on pooled hazard ratios with a random-effects model.

Results

Two randomized clinical trials and 28 observational studies were included, involving 1961 and 2787 patients who underwent rHR and ablation respectively. Median perioperative mortality in both groups was zero but patients in the rHR group had higher median morbidity rates (17.0 per cent) than those in the ablation group (3.3 per cent). rHR achieved significantly longer recurrence-free survival than ablation (HR 0.79, 95 per cent c.i. 0.70 to 0.89, P < 0.001), while both groups had similar overall survival (HR 0.93, 95 per cent c.i. 0.83 to 1.04, P = 0.18).

Conclusion

rHR and ablation based on radio- or microwaves are associated with similar overall survival in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after resection of the primary tumour.

Transarterial Chemoembolization Combined With Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Repeat Hepatectomy for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Curative Resection: A 10-Year Single-Center Comparative Study

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in combination with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (TACE-RFA) and repeat hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative resection.

Methods

This retrospective study evaluated consecutive medical records of patients who received either TACE-RFA or repeat hepatectomy between January 2010 and May 2021. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and complications were compared.

Results

Of the 2672 patients who received either TACE-RFA or repeat hepatectomy, 111 eligible patients were included in our study, 63 in the TACE-RFA group and 48 in the repeat hepatectomy group. The median OS was 38 months in the TACE-RFA group and 42 months in the repeat hepatectomy group, with no statistically difference between the two groups (P=0.45). Meanwhile, there was also no statistically significant difference in PFS between the two groups (P=0.634). Although both groups achieved similar outcomes, the rate of major complications was significantly higher in the repeat hepatectomy group (P=0.003).

Conclusions

Patients with recurrent HCC in the TACE-RFA group and the repeat hepatectomy group had similar OS and PFS regardless of the patient’s tumor diameter, but the TACE-RFA group was safer and more minimally invasive.

Liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are commonly used for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but the optimal treatment modality remains unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of LR vs RFA for recurrent HCC.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary outcomes were major complications and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with 1991 patients with recurrent HCC were included. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for OS demonstrated that LR had significantly better OS than RFA in recurrent HCC (HR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.95). Specifically, LR was associated with higher 2-, 3- and 4-year OS rates compared with RFA. The pooled HR for DFS showed no significant difference between LR and RFA during the whole follow-up period (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.76-1.07). However, LR was associated with significantly higher 2- to 5-year DFS rates compared to RFA. LR was also associated with more major complications (p < .001) and longer hospital stay (p < .001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that LR and RFA had similar efficacy in patients with recurrent tumors less than 3 cm or patients presenting three or fewer recurrent nodules.

CONCLUSION

LR could provide better long-term survival outcomes than RFA for recurrent HCC patients, while RFA has a higher safety profile. RFA can be a good alternative to LR for patients with small-sized recurrence or patients with a limited number of recurrent nodules. However, as tumor size increases, LR tends to be more efficacious.

Long-term Effects of Repeat Hepatectomy vs Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation Among Patients With Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Repeat hepatectomy and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) are most commonly used to treat early-stage recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) after initial resection, but previous studies comparing the effectiveness of the 2 treatments have reported conflicting results.

Objective

To compare the long-term survival outcomes after repeat hepatectomy with those after PRFA among patients with early-stage RHCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted at the Eastern Hepatobiliary Surgery Hospital and the National Center for Liver Cancer of China. A total of 240 patients with RHCC (with a solitary nodule diameter of ≤5 cm; 3 or fewer nodules, each ≤3 cm in diameter; and no macroscopic vascular invasion or distant metastasis) were randomized 1:1 to receive repeat hepatectomy or PRFA between June 3, 2010, and January 15, 2013. The median (range) follow-up time was 44.3 (4.3-90.6) months (last follow-up, January 15, 2018). Data analysis was conducted from June 15, 2018, to September 28, 2018.

Interventions

Repeat hepatectomy (n = 120) or PRFA (n = 120).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included repeat recurrence-free survival (rRFS), patterns of repeat recurrence, and therapeutic safety.

Results

Among the 240 randomized patients (216 men [90.0%]; median [range] age, 53.0 [24.0-59.0] years), 217 completed the trial. In the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year OS rates were 92.5% (95% CI, 87.9%-97.3%), 65.8% (95% CI, 57.8%-74.8%), and 43.6% (95% CI, 35.5%-53.5%), respectively, for the repeat hepatectomy group and 87.5% (95% CI, 81.8%-93.6%), 52.5% (95% CI, 44.2%-62.2%), and 38.5% (95% CI, 30.6%-48.4%), respectively, for the PRFA group (P = .17). The corresponding 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year rRFS rates were 85.0% (95% CI, 78.8%-91.6%), 52.4% (95% CI, 44.2%-62.2%), and 36.2% (95% CI, 28.5%-46.0%), respectively, for the repeat hepatectomy group and 74.2% (95% CI, 66.7%-82.4%), 41.7% (95% CI, 33.7%-51.5%), and 30.2% (95% CI, 22.9%-39.8%), respectively, for the PRFA group (P = .09). Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation was associated with a higher incidence of local repeat recurrence (37.8% vs 21.7%, P = .04) and early repeat recurrence than repeat hepatectomy (40.3% vs 23.3%, P = .04). In subgroup analyses, PRFA was associated with worse OS vs repeat hepatectomy among patients with an RHCC nodule diameter greater than 3 cm (hazard ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.05-2.84) or an α fetoprotein level greater than 200 ng/mL (hazard ratio, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.15-2.96). Surgery had a higher complication rate than did ablation (22.4% vs 7.3%, P = .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

No statistically significant difference was observed in survival outcomes after repeat hepatectomy vs PRFA for patients with early-stage RHCC. Repeat hepatectomy may be associated with better local disease control and long-term survival in patients with an RHCC diameter greater than 3 cm or an AFP level greater than 200 ng/mL.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00822562.

Radiofrequency ablation versus hepatic resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefits of treatment with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and repeat hepatic resection (RHR) for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) remain controversial. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the outcomes and major complications of RFA versus RHR in patients with early-stage RHCC.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for comparative studies on the evaluation of RHR versus RFA for RHCC. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and major complications. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model or fixed-effects model, and heterogeneity was tested by the Cochran Q statistic.

RESULTS

Ten studies with 1612 patients (RHR = 654, RFA = 958) were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that RHR had superior OS (HR 0.77, 95% CI =0.65-0.92, P = 0.004) and PFS (HR 0.81, 95% CI =0.67-0.98, P = 0.027) compared to RFA, whereas major complications may be less frequent in the RFA group (OR 0.15, 95% CI = 0.06-0.39, P < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis of patients with single RHCC ≤3 cm, OS (HR 1.03, 95% CI =0.69-1.52, P = 0.897) and PFS (HR 0.99, 95% CI = 0.71-1.37, P = 0.929) showed no significant differences in the comparison of RHR and RFA. In single RHCC> 3 cm and ≤ 5 cm, RFA showed an increased mortality in terms of OS (HR 0.57, 95% CI = 0.37-0.89, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

RHR offers a longer OS and PFS than RFA for patients with RHCC, but no statistically significant difference was observed for single RHCC ≤3 cm. The advantages of fewer major complications may render RFA an alternative treatment option for selected patients.

Repeat hepatic resection VS radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This paper evaluates the efficacy and safety of repeat hepatic resection and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrieved and collected all relevant articles from the inception to 8 March 2020. After data extraction, we conducted meta-analysis and carried out the heterogeneity test, sensitivity analysis, and publication bias test to evaluate reliability.

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies with 1746 patients (rHR 837, RFA 909) were included. rHR was similar to RFA in a one-year overall survival rate (OS), while rHR was superior to RFA in 3- and 5-year OS and 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates (DFS), but the procedure-related complications of RFA were significantly less than those of rHR. Among the subgroups with Milan criteria, rHR was similar to RFA in 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS and 1-year DFS, but superior to RFA in 3- and 5-year DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

RFA is the first choice for recurrent HCC meeting Milan criteria. When it does not meet the Milan criteria, minimally invasive treatment should not be carried out at the cost of survival, and rHR should be the first choice.

Ablative therapies for hepatic and biliary tumors: endohepatology coming of age

Ablative therapies refer to minimally invasive procedures performed to destroy abnormal tissue that may arise with many conditions, and can be achieved clinically using chemical, thermal, and other techniques. In this review article, we explore the different ablative therapies used in the management of hepatic and biliary malignancies, namely hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), with a particular focus on radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and photodynamic therapy (PDT) techniques.

Treatment optimization for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: Repeat hepatic resection versus radiofrequency ablation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal treatment strategy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the outcomes of repeat hepatic resection (RHR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for recurrent HCC.

METHOD

From December 2004 to December 2015, 138 patients who underwent RHR and 194 patients who underwent RFA were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to establish 1:1 RHR-RFA group matching. Clinical outcomes were compared before and after matching.

RESULTS

Before matching, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year postrecurrence survival (PRS) rates were 91.8%, 82.0%, and 72.9% for the RHR group (n = 138) and 94.4%, 75.4%, and 61.7% for the RFA group (n = 194), respectively (P = .380). After matching, the PRS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 90.5%, 81.5%, and 71.8% for the RHR group (n = 120) and 91.0%, 61.0%, and 41.7% for the RFA group (n = 120), respectively (P = .002). In the subgroup analysis, the PRS rates for the RHR group were better than those for the RFA group for patients who relapsed within 2 years (P = .004) or patients with primary tumor burden beyond the Milan criteria (P = .004). Multivariate analysis showed that treatment allocation was identified as an independent prognostic factor for PRS.

CONCLUSION

Compared with RFA, RHR provided a survival advantage for recurrent HCC, especially for patients who relapsed within 2 years and those with primary tumor burden beyond the Milan criteria.

Efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization compared with radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after radiofrequency ablation

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and outcome of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after initial RFA.Material and methods: From January 2008 to December 2014, 199 consecutive patients with primary HCC underwent percutaneous RFA as initial treatment. One hundred and fourteen patients developed intrahepatic recurrent HCC after initial RFA. The patients with recurrent tumor size ≤3 cm and tumor numbers ≤3 who underwent RFA (n = 47) or TACE (n = 31) were included in study. Progression-free survival (PFS), tumor response to treatment and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Prognostic factors for OS were analyzed using multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.Results: The baseline data of initial HCC and the first recurrence of HCC were comparable in both groups. The complete response (CR) rate in the RFA group and the TACE group was 95.7% and 50%, respectively (p < .001). The PFS time in the RFA group and the TACE group was 424 days and 275 days, respectively (p = .004). The one-year and three-year cumulative overall survival rate was 93.5% and 45% in the TACE group, 91.3% and 68.8% in the RFA group (p = .49), respectively. Significant predictive factors for OS were tumor size (HR = 1.951, 95%CI 1.061-3.687, p = .032), prothrombin time (HR = 1.59, 95%CI 1.012-2.498, p = .044) and response to treatment (HR = 0.267, 95%CI 0.092-0.78, p = .016).Conclusion: Repeated RFA is still considered to be the first treatment choice for patients with post-RFA intrahepatic recurrence. However, TACE should also be considered due to comparable overall survival benefits. The advantages of being less invasive and highly repeatable may render TACE to be a preferred treatment for some patients with recurrent HCC after RFA.

Comparison of repeated surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation for small recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after primary resection

There is controversy concerning whether radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or surgical resection (SR) is a better treatment option for recurrent HCC after resection. In Kaohsiung Veteran General Hospital, from January 2002 to September 2014, a total of 100 consecutive patients who developed recurrent HCCs with a tumor size ≦ 3 cm and tumor numbers ≦ 3 after surgical resection were enrolled. Among these patients, 57 patients received RFA and 43 patients underwent repeated SR. Baseline characteristics at the time of recurrence after hepatic resection and clinical outcomes following treatment of recurrent HCC were compared between the two groups. The baseline data of initial HCC and the first recurrence of HCC were comparable in both groups. The 1-, 3-, 5-year overall survival rates following treatment of the first recurrence of HCC were 97.6%, 82.7%, 56.4% in the repeated SR group and 98.2%, 77.2%, 52.6% in the RFA group (p = 0.69). The 1-, 3-, 5-year disease-free survival rates were 57.0%, 32.1%, 28.6% in the repeated SR group and 60.8%, 26.6%, 16.6% in the RFA group ((p = 0.89). There was a trend whereby patients who underwent repeated SR had more procedure-related morbidity than patients who underwent RFA (16% vs. 7%, p = 0.14). The median total hospital days were longer in the repeated SR group than that in the RFA group (13 vs. 5 days, p < 0.05). In the small recurrent HCCs after SR, RFA achieved similar overall survival and disease-free survival than those with repeated SR as well as having a shorter hospital stay.

Survival following redo hepatectomy vs radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Redo hepatic resection (RHR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are salvage treatment choices for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC). As yet, it is unclear as to which treatment modality is superior in terms of long term survival. The aim of this study was to compare the survival benefits and treatment efficacy of RHR and RFA for recurrent HCC.

METHODS

A literature review using the EMBASE, Medline, Google scholar, and Cochrane databases was performed. Meta-analyses were performed using an inference of variance, random effects model for 1, 3 and 5-year Disease Free Survival (DFS) and Overall Survival (OS). Secondary outcomes were major morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Five retrospective studies including 639 patients were eligible. Overall, there were no differences in 1, 3 and 5-year DFS or OS for patients undergoing RHR or RFA for recurrent HCC. Comparison between the two groups demonstrated similar 5-year DFS (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67-1.11, p = 0.250) and 5-year OS (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.83-1.27, p = 0.082). However, RFA had a lower morbidity rate (2%) compared with RHR (17%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates, neither RHR nor RFA appeared to be superior in terms of DFS and OS. Well-constructed, randomised, multicenter trials will be required to determine if a true difference exists.

Salvage resection for recurrent or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma after percutaneous ablation therapy

INTRODUCTION

To retrospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of salvage resection(SR) for recurrence or metastasis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after initial percutaneous ablation therapy (PAT).

METHODS

From September 2006 to September 2013, 50 consecutive patients who received SR for recurrent or metastatic HCC undergone initial PAT were enrolled. Safety and efficacy of SR for these patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

No treatment-related death occurred. Curative outcome was achieved in all the patients. The median overall survival after SR was 40 months, and the 1-, 3-, 5-year overall survival rate after SR was 85.2%, 46.4% and 34.8%, respectively. The disease-free survival was 38.6% at 1 year and 12.1% at 3 years after SR.

CONCLUSION

SR is an effective and safe method for patients with recurrent or metastatic HCC after initial PAT treatment.

Strategic overview on the best treatment option for intrahepaitc hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence

INTRODUCTION

The long-term survival after hepatectomy for HCC remains unsatisfactory because of the high incidence of recurrence. The cumulative 5-year recurrence rate ranged from 60-100% in previous studies and majority of them remains intrahepatic recurrence. The therapeutic modalities commonly used for primary tumors, including surgical resection, liver transplantation, TACE, local ablative therapy and radiotherapy have been used to treat recurrent tumors in the liver remnant and the outcomes with the heterogeneous therapeutic options are reviewed. It is important to note that the level of evidence for most therapeutic options is limited to cohort investigations with few RCTs and most were limited due to enrollment of various tumor stages and did not compare treatment modalities for specific tumor stages.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search for recurrent HCC was performed using Medline and PubMed up to May 2016. Expert commentary: The long term survival results after re-resection for recurrent HCC were favourable and aggressive management of postoperative intrahepatic recurrence remains the most important strategy in prolonging the survival of patients after resection of HCC.

Review of 103 Cases of Laparoscopic Repeat Liver Resection for Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic repeat liver resection (LRLR) has been shown in small retrospective studies to be a safe and effective treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) in selected patients. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the current literature to determine the safety, feasibility, and oncologic integrity of LRLR for rHCC.

METHODS

A computerized search of the PubMed database was performed for all English language studies evaluating LRLR for HCC from January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2016.

RESULTS

Ten studies reporting on 103 patients were included in this review. 30/51 (58.5%) patients had liver cirrhosis. In 66/95 (69.5%) patients, the index surgery was an open resection and this was a major hepatectomy in 8/49 (16.3%) patients. In 17/72 (23.6%) patients, LRLR was performed for tumors in the posterosuperior segments and in 21/60 (35%) for ipsilateral HCC recurrence. The median tumor size of rHCC ranged from 17-40 mm and 8/69 (11.6%) LRLR were for multifocal rHCC. In 100/103 (97%) patients LRLR was attempted via pure laparoscopy and 2 (1.9%) required open conversion. Median operation time of LRLR ranged from 73-343 minutes and the median blood loss ranged from 50 to 297 mL. The reported postoperative morbidity was 24/97 (24.7%) and there was no postoperative mortality. The median postoperative length of stay ranged from 3.5 to 11 days. Three studies compared the outcomes of LRLR versus open resection for rHCC and all three demonstrated a significant decrease in blood loss in favor of LRLR.

CONCLUSION

In highly selected patients; LRLR for rHCC is feasible and safe. LRLR can be performed for patients with previous open LR, previous major hepatectomy, two previous LR, multiple tumors, liver cirrhosis, ipsilateral HCC recurrence, and cancers located in the difficult posterosuperior segments. Comparative studies have demonstrated that LRLR is superior to open repeat liver resection in terms of perioperative outcomes such as decreased blood loss and length of stay.

Ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of clinical efficacy and prognostic factors

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) typically recurs following primary treatment. The primary objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ablative therapies for recurrent HCC. The secondary objective was to identify any factors associated with prognosis following ablation for recurrent disease.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature published between January 2000 and December 2013 was undertaken using the PubMed, Medline and Scopus databases. Reference lists from selected studies were manually searched to ensure complete capture of any relevant data.

RESULTS

A total of 19 studies were included in the review. The median age of patients undergoing ablation for recurrent HCC was 58 years (range 52-69 years) and 85 % of patients had cirrhosis (range 56-100 %). HCC recurred as a single nodule in 79 % of those treated with ablation (range 46-100 %). There were few significant complications associated with any form of ablation. Sufficient data were only available to allow analysis of survival outcomes following radiofrequency ablation (RFA). After RFA the median, 1, 3 and 5-year survivals were 84 % (73-99 %), 51 % (42-84 %) and 40 % (28-83 %), respectively. The only factor consistently associated with overall survival following ablation for recurrence was the alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level.

CONCLUSION

Comparable survival figures from previously published systematic reviews suggest that hepatic resection is the most effective treatment for recurrent HCC. However, ablation can be a safe and effective option for the majority of patients with recurrent disease who are unsuitable for surgery. Elevated levels of AFP suggest a poorer prognosis following ablation.

Radiofrequency ablation versus reresection in treating recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis

Treatment for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) remains controversial. This study tried to compare survival benefits between radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and reresection for RHCC patients following curative surgical treatments.Databases were searched for comparative studies published from 2008 to 2014 on RFA versus reresection in treating RHCC. Meta-analysis was performed using a random or fixed-effect model to compare the overall survivals (OSs) and disease-free survivals (DFSs) between RFA and reresection. Begg funnel plot and Egger test were performed to assess the publication bias.Six retrospective comparative studies fulfilled our criteria and were included. For patients with RHCC, RFA was equivalent to reresection in 1-year OSs (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.49; P = 0.587), 3-year OSs (OR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.64-1.28; P = 0.581), and 5-year OSs (OR 0.97; 95% CI, 0.69-1.36; P = 0.846). However, reresection was superior to RFA in 3-year DFSs (OR 2.25; 95% CI, 1.37-3.68; P = 0.001) and 5-year DFSs (OR 3.70; 95% CI, 1.98-6.93; P = 0.000). The outcome of 1-year DFSs was unstable with statistical heterogeneity among studies included in meta-analysis (I = 77.4%). No evidence of publication bias was found. RFA was considered as a less invasive modality for RHCC patients.RFA achieves comparable OSs as reresection in the treatment of RHCC, with lower postoperative complications.

Value of radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a malignant disease that substantially affects public health worldwide. It is especially prevalent in east Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, where the main etiology is the endemic status of chronic hepatitis B. Effective treatments with curative intent for early HCC include liver transplantation, liver resection (LR), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). RFA has become the most widely used local thermal ablation method in recent years because of its technical ease, safety, satisfactory local tumor control, and minimally invasive nature. This technique has also emerged as an important treatment strategy for HCC in recent years. RFA, liver transplantation, and hepatectomy can be complementary to one another in the treatment of HCC, and the outcome benefits have been demonstrated by numerous clinical studies. As a pretransplantation bridge therapy, RFA extends the average waiting time without increasing the risk of dropout or death. In contrast to LR, RFA causes almost no intra-abdominal adhesion, thus producing favorable conditions for subsequent liver transplantation. Many studies have demonstrated mutual interactions between RFA and hepatectomy, effectively expanding the operative indications for patients with HCC and enhancing the efficacy of these approaches. However, treated tumor tissue remains within the body after RFA, and residual tumors or satellite nodules can limit the effectiveness of this treatment. Therefore, future research should focus on this issue.

Transarterial chemoembolization versus surgery/radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma with or without microvascular invasion

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Microvascular invasion (MVI) is a well-known prognostic factor of postoperative recurrence and of overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We compared the treatment outcomes of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and surgery/radiofrequency ablation (RFA) according to the presence of MVI in patients with early or late recurrent HCC that presented as Barcelona Clinical Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage 0 or A after curative resection for HCC.

METHODS

A consecutive 68 patients with recurrent HCC of BCLC stage 0 or A at our institution between 1998 and 2012 were retrospectively enrolled. We compared the outcomes of patients treated by TACE or surgery/RFA. Tumor recurrence after curative resection was classified as early (≤ 12 months) or late (> 12 months) recurrence.

RESULTS

Median tumor size was 1.5 cm (range, 1-10 cm), and 67 (98.5%) had HCCs within the Milan criteria. Median post-retreatment follow-up duration was 27 months (range, 1-109 months). Of the 68 patients, 19 (27.9%) underwent surgery/RFA, 47 (69.1%) TACE, and 2 (2.9%) were lost to follow-up. After retreatment, TACE showed significantly higher OS and recurrence-free survival rates than surgery/RFA in MVI-positive patients (P = 0.03 and P = 0.05, respectively), but not in MVI-negative patients (P = 0.95 and P = 0.98, respectively). In particular, in early recurred MVI-positive patients, TACE had a significantly higher OS rate than surgery/RFA (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

TACE may be the more effective treatment option for recurrent HCC of BCLC stage 0 or A than surgery/RFA in MVI-positive patients, especially in those that recur early after curative resection.

Percutaneous ablation therapy versus surgical resection in the treatment for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of 21,494 patients

PURPOSE

To compare comprehensively the benefits of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) with those of surgical resection (SR) in early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

The potentially relevant studies comparing the efficacy and safety of RFA and/or PEI with those of SR were searched using the databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and Chinese databases (CNKI and Wanfang data). Overall survival rate, recurrence-free survival rate and complications were compared and analyzed. Pooled odds ratios with 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CIs) were calculated using either the fixed-effects model or random-effects model. All statistic analyses were conducted using the Review Manager (version 5.1.) from the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Our analysis showed that the overall survival rate in patients treated with SR was significantly higher than that of percutaneous ablation therapy (PAT) [SR vs. PAT: 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI)2-year 0.46-0.89, P = 0.009; 95 % CI3-year 0.57-0.83, P < 0.0001; 95 % CI5-year 0.45-0.46, P < 0.0001]. SR was associated with significantly higher recurrence-free survival rate compared with PAT (SR vs. PAT: 95 % CI1-year 0.51-0.90, P = 0.008; 95 % CI2-year 0.41-0.78, P = 0.0004; 95 % CI3-year 0.38-0.77, P = 0.0006; 95 % CI5-year 0.33-0.61, P < 0.0001). SR resulted in longer survival than PAT in HCCs no larger than 3 cm. PAT was associated with less complications compared with SR (PAT vs. SR: 95 % CI 0.14-0.76, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Although SR was associated with more complications, SR was superior to RFA and PEI for treatment of patients with early-stage HCC.