Outcomes of laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared the therapeutic outcomes in patients with HCC who underwent laparoscopic radiofrequency ablation (LRFA) versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Therefore, this study compared the recurrence and survival outcomes of the two RFA methods in patients with HCC.

METHODS

Recurrence and overall survival outcomes were evaluated in 307 patients who underwent LRFA (n = 151) or PRFA (n = 156) as a treatment method for de novo HCC. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed to reduce the impact of treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in major baseline characteristics between the LRFA and PRFA groups. However, the proportion of cirrhotic patients was higher in the LRFA group, whereas the LRFA group had more tumors and a more advanced tumor-node-metastasis stage. Moreover, the mean tumor size was significantly larger in the LRFA group than in the PRFA group. In a multivariate analysis, serum albumin level, more than three tumors, and the RFA method were identified as significant predictors of recurrence-free survival. Moreover, for the overall survival of HCC patients, serum albumin levels, days of hospital stay during RFA, and the RFA method were independent predictors. In the IPTW-adjusted analysis, the LRFA group showed significantly higher recurrence-free survival and overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed that compared with PRFA, LRFA was associated with longer recurrence-free survival and favorable overall survival in patients with HCC. Therefore, LRFA should be considered the primary therapy in patients with HCC eligible for RFA.