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

20Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

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

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yang, Y., Yu, H., Tan, X., You, Y., Liu, F., Zhao, T., … Zhu, Q. (2021). Liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Hyperthermia. Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/02656736.2021.1933218

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free