A comparative study of hepatic resection and transcatheter arterial embolization for the treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND

Because transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) has been shown to be effective in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the question arises whether TAE has an equivalent or superior effect on resectable HCC compared with surgery. To clarify this point, the authors compared the therapeutic results achieved by surgery and TAE in patients with early-stage HCC and well-preserved liver function, who were independently treated by two different policies in two separate departments of the same university hospital during the same period.

METHODS

From 1983 to 1987, 67 patients with HCC underwent hepatic resection at the Department of Surgery of Kyushu University Hospital. During the same period, TAE was the treatment of first choice for HCC, and surgical resection was not chosen in the Department of Internal Medicine of the hospital. TAE was done in 68 patients, who were evaluated blindly in terms of liver function reserve and roentgenographic resectability of the tumor. Among the 68 patients, 20 were thought to have anatomically and functionally resectable disease. The therapeutic results obtained in the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year cumulative survival rates for 67 patients undergoing surgery, including one operative death and four hospital deaths, were 89.1%, 74.6%, and 54.6%, respectively. However, the rates were 90.0%, 50.0%, and 17.5%, respectively, for the 20 patients treated with TAE; these differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery can offer more favorable results in patients with early-stage HCC compared with TAE.