Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of repeated hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of primary recurrent liver cancer: a meta-analysis.


ABSTRACT:

Background

Since there is still controversy about the comparison of the efficacy and safety of RH and RFA in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety, in order to provide evidence-based evidence for future research and clinical treatment.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from the establishment of the database to Feb 2021. We included studies that reported liver cancer patients underwent repeated hepatectomy (RH) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and we excluded duplicate publications, research without full text, incomplete information, or inability to conduct data extraction, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews. The STATA 15.1 was used to analyze the data.

Results

The pooled results show that the 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (odds ratio (OR) = 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI):1.47-2.60, P ≤ 0.001; OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.12-2.43, P = 0.012). Similarly, the pooled results show that the 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (OR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.30-2.31, P ≤ 0.001; OR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.38-2.49, P ≤ 0.001). However, there is no significant difference in the 1-year OS and DFS rate of repeated hepatectomy group and radiofrequency ablation group. Additionally, the pooled results show that the postoperative Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade II or higher complication rate of the repeated hepatectomy group was significantly higher than the radiofrequency ablation group (OR = 2.80, 95% CI: 1.37-5.75, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Based on the pooled results of 8 existing retrospective studies, RH has a higher OS rate and DFS rate in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, while the postoperative complication rate of RFA is lower. When survival is the primary goal, RH should be the first choice for recurrent liver cancer.

SUBMITTER: Chen Z 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9169306 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of repeated hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of primary recurrent liver cancer: a meta-analysis.

Chen Zhichao Z   Wang Jiefang J   Lin Yonghua Y  

World journal of surgical oncology 20220606 1


<h4>Background</h4>Since there is still controversy about the comparison of the efficacy and safety of RH and RFA in the treatment of recurrent liver cancer, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety, in order to provide evidence-based evidence for future research and clinical treatment.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from the establishment of the database to Feb 2021. We included studies that reported liver cancer patients underwent repeate  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC10560222 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC11394299 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9260661 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC11312699 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8204439 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC10982298 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9328506 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6902111 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC9650158 | biostudies-literature