Cao Guangshao, Liu Yuyan, Li Lupeng, Zhao Xiaoyang, Liu Ruiqing, Liu Jian, Liu Jianwen, Cao Huicun
Department of Intervention, Henan Provincial People's Hospital, People's Hospital of Zhengzhou University, People's Hospital of Henan University, Zhengzhou, Henan, People's Republic of China.
Cancer Manag Res. 2021 Jul 5;13:5373-5382. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S308097. eCollection 2021.
There has been very limited investigation regarding the comparison of adverse events (AEs) among radiofrequency ablation (RFA), conventional transarterial chemoembolization (cTACE), and drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE) in treating HCC patients; therefore, the present study aimed to resolve this issue.
Two-hundred and forty-six HCC patients (with a total of 267 procedures [treatment times]) treated with RFA (73 patients with 79 procedures), cTACE (86 patients with 94 procedures), or DEB-TACE (87 patients with 94 procedures) were included. Demographic and clinical data were collected. The information on AEs was also retrieved and analyzed.
Total AEs incidence was notably different among the RFA group, cTACE group, and DEB-TACE group and was the highest in cTACE group (86.2%), then in DEB-TACE group (76.6%), and the lowest in RFA group (63.3%). Regarding specific AEs incidence, the incidences of fever, fatigue, and nausea were distinctive among the three groups, while no distinctiveness was found in incidence of other AEs. Furthermore, multivariate logistic regression revealed that cTACE (versus RFA) was independently correlated with increased risk of total AEs, fatigue, and nausea/vomiting; however, the interventional therapies were not independently correlated with the risk of pain, fever or constipation. Other independent predictive factors for total AEs risk were male gender, bronchial asthma, and disease duration.
cTACE resulted in the highest AEs incidence compared with RFA and DEB-TACE in treating HCC patients.
关于射频消融(RFA)、传统经动脉化疗栓塞术(cTACE)和载药微球经动脉化疗栓塞术(DEB-TACE)治疗肝癌患者时不良事件(AE)的比较研究非常有限;因此,本研究旨在解决这一问题。
纳入246例接受RFA(73例患者,共79次治疗)、cTACE(86例患者,共94次治疗)或DEB-TACE(87例患者,共94次治疗)的肝癌患者。收集人口统计学和临床数据。还检索并分析了不良事件信息。
RFA组、cTACE组和DEB-TACE组的总不良事件发生率显著不同,cTACE组最高(86.2%),其次是DEB-TACE组(76.6%),RFA组最低(63.3%)。关于特定不良事件的发生率,三组中发热、疲劳和恶心的发生率有显著差异,而其他不良事件的发生率无显著差异。此外,多因素logistic回归显示,cTACE(与RFA相比)与总不良事件、疲劳和恶心/呕吐风险增加独立相关;然而,介入治疗与疼痛、发热或便秘风险无独立相关性。总不良事件风险的其他独立预测因素为男性、支气管哮喘和病程。
在治疗肝癌患者时,与RFA和DEB-TACE相比,cTACE导致的不良事件发生率最高。