Comparison of microwave ablation and radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Microwave ablation (MWA) has several advantages over radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of MWA with those of RFA for HCC from the perspectives of percutaneous and laparoscopic approaches.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane library, and China Biology Medicine databases were searched. Studies comparing the efficacy and safety of MWA with those of RFA in patients with HCC were considered eligible. Complete ablation (CA), local recurrence (LR), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and the major complication rate were compared between MWA and RFA.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and 10 cohort studies were included. For percutaneous ablation, no significant difference was found between MWA and RFA regarding CA, LR, DFS, OS, and the major complication rate. A subgroup analysis of tumors measuring ≥3 cm revealed no difference in CA and LR for percutaneous ablation. For laparoscopic ablation, a significantly lower LR rate and a non-significant trend toward a higher major complication rate were observed for the MWA group (odds ratio [OR] 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-4.02, p = .01 for LR; OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04-1.03, p = .05 for major complication rate). CA, DFS, and OS were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous (P)-MWA had similar therapeutic effects compared with P-RFA for HCC. Patients undergoing laparoscopic MWA had a lower LR rate; however, their major complication rate appeared to be higher. The superiority of MWA over RFA remains unclear and needs to be confirmed by high-quality evidence.