Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Fuzhou First Hospital Affiliated with Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, 350009, China.
Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Fujian Institute of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, 29 Xinquan Road, Fuzhou, 350001, China.
Hepatol Int. 2024 Jun;18(3):998-1010. doi: 10.1007/s12072-024-10645-x. Epub 2024 Mar 14.
The approach in small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, no prospective randomized trials to compare ablative or surgical approaches. We compared the surgical and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in small HCC patients based on matched cohort studies that performed propensity score matching (PSM).
We systemically searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and the Chinese BioMedical Literature (CBM) databases. All published propensity score-matched studies that compared LH and RFA for small HCC were included in this study.
Eight studies with a total of 1273 small HCC cases were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that there was no significant difference in the 1- year overall survival (OS) rate between the two groups, whereas the LH group had significantly higher 3- year overall survival rate (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.20, p < 0.00001) as well as 1- and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates (RR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.22-1.42, p < 0.00001; RR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.46-1.90, p < 0.00001) than the RFA group. Meanwhile, the local recurrence rate and intrahepatic distant recurrence rate were significantly lower in the LH group than in the RFA group (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.20-0.42, p < 0.00001; RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92, p = 0.01). In comparison with the LH group, the RFA group had a lower incidence of overall and major postoperative complications (RR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.47-2.24, p < 0.00001; RR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.48-5.12, p = 0.001), but there was no significant difference in postoperative mortality between the two groups. In addition, further comparison of single postoperative complications showed that the incidence of ascites was lower in the RFA group than in the LH group (RR = 3.62, 95% CI 1.64-7.96, p = 0.001), whereas there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative bleeding, abdominal infection and bile leakage between the two groups (RR = 3.50, 95% CI 0.74-16.61, p = 0.11; RR = 5.00, 95% CI 0.59-42.23, p = 0.14; RR = 4.00, 95% CI 0.45-35.23, p = 0.21). Besides, the hospital stay was shorter in the RFA group than in the LH group (MD = 4.29, 95% CI 2.06-6.53, p = 0.0002).
Our meta-analysis demonstrated that in comparison with RFA in the treatment of small HCC, LH provided superior long-term OS and DFS together with lower rates of local and intrahepatic distant recurrence after surgery. However, RFA was associated with better short-term outcomes.
小肝癌的治疗方法存在争议,目前尚无前瞻性随机试验比较消融或手术方法。我们通过倾向评分匹配(PSM)的匹配队列研究比较了腹腔镜肝切除术(LH)和射频消融(RFA)治疗小肝癌的手术和肿瘤学结局。
我们系统地检索了 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、Embase、Web of Science 和中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)。本研究纳入了所有发表的比较 LH 和 RFA 治疗小 HCC 的倾向评分匹配研究。
共有 8 项研究,共纳入 1273 例小 HCC 患者。荟萃分析结果显示,两组患者 1 年总生存率(OS)率无显著差异,但 LH 组患者 3 年总生存率(RR=1.14,95%CI 1.08-1.20,p<0.00001)和 1 年、3 年无病生存率(DFS)率(RR=1.31,95%CI 1.22-1.42,p<0.00001;RR=1.66,95%CI 1.46-1.90,p<0.00001)均显著更高。同时,LH 组患者局部复发率和肝内远处复发率明显低于 RFA 组(RR=0.29,95%CI 0.20-0.42,p<0.00001;RR=0.67,95%CI 0.49-0.92,p=0.01)。与 LH 组相比,RFA 组术后总并发症和主要并发症发生率较低(RR=1.81,95%CI 1.47-2.24,p<0.00001;RR=2.76,95%CI 1.48-5.12,p=0.001),但两组术后死亡率无显著差异。此外,进一步比较单发性术后并发症显示,RFA 组患者腹水发生率低于 LH 组(RR=3.62,95%CI 1.64-7.96,p=0.001),而两组术后出血、腹部感染和胆漏发生率无显著差异(RR=3.50,95%CI 0.74-16.61,p=0.11;RR=5.00,95%CI 0.59-42.23,p=0.14;RR=4.00,95%CI 0.45-35.23,p=0.21)。此外,RFA 组患者的住院时间短于 LH 组(MD=-4.29,95%CI 2.06-6.53,p=0.0002)。
本荟萃分析表明,与 RFA 治疗小肝癌相比,LH 可提供更好的长期 OS 和 DFS,同时术后局部和肝内远处复发率较低。然而,RFA 具有更好的短期预后。