• Jianmin Ding, Xiang Jing, Jibin Liu, Yandong Wang, Fengmei Wang, Yijun Wang, and Zhi Du.
• Department of Ultrasound, Tianjin Third Central Hospital, Tianjin 300170, China. djmzyn1982@sina.com
• Eur J Radiol. 2013 Sep 1; 82 (9): 1379-84.

PurposeTo compare the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) in treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) while conforming to the Milan criteria.Materials And MethodsThe study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, and informed consent was waived due to the retrospective study design. One hundred ninety-eight patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Eighty-five patients with 98 lesions received RFA, and 113 patients with 131 lesions underwent MWA. Complete ablation rates, local recurrence rates, disease-free survival rates, cumulative survival rates, and major complications were compared between the two treatment groups.ResultsComplete ablation rates were 99.0% for RFA and 98.5% for MWA (P=1.000). Local recurrence rates were 5.2% for RFA and 10.9% for MWA (P=0.127). Disease-free survival rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 80.3%, 61.8%, 39.5%, and 19.0% in the RFA group and 75.0%, 59.4%, 32.1%, and 16.1% in the MWA group, respectively (P=0.376). Cumulative survival rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 98.7%, 92.3%, 82.7%, and 77.8% in the RFA group and 98.0%, 90.7%, 77.6%, and 77.6% in the MWA group, respectively (P=0.729). Major complication rates were 2.4% and 2.7% in the RFA group and the MWA group, respectively (P=1.000). There were no patient deaths due to treatment.ConclusionRFA and MWA have the same clinical value in treating HCC conforming to the Milan criteria. RFA and MWA are both safe and effective techniques for HCC as clinical application.Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

34 keywords...

hide…