These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The (Eternal) Debate on Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in BCLC-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
    Author: Ricci AD, Rizzo A, Bonucci C, Tavolari S, Palloni A, Frega G, Mollica V, Tober N, Mazzotta E, Felicani C, Serra C, Brandi G.
    Journal: In Vivo; 2020; 34(6):3421-3429. PubMed ID: 33144450.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND/AIM: While percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered the standard ablative modality for the treatment of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) is being increasingly used in recent years. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare percutaneous MWA versus percutaneous RFA in BCLC-A HCC across randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible studies included RCTs assessing MWA versus RFA in BCLC-A HCC. Outcomes of interest included: complete ablation (CA) rate, local recurrence (LR) rate, 1-year overall survival (OS) rate, 3-year OS rate and major complications rate. RESULTS: We retrieved all the relevant RCTs through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library and EMBASE; five eligible studies involving a total of 794 patients (MWA: 409; RFA: 385) and 1008 nodules of HCC (MWA: 519; RFA: 489) were included in our analysis. No significant differences were found between MWA and RFA regarding CA, LR, 3-year OS and major complications rate. Regarding 1-year OS, a higher rate was observed in the MWA group. CONCLUSION: MWA and RFA are effective and safe techniques in early stage, BCLC-A, HCCMWA resulted in better 1-year OS, although this benefit was not confirmed in the 3-year analysis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]