Background: Both radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) are minimally invasive approach for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at early stage. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of RFA and LH for treating HCC with a large cohort.
Methods: From March 2014 to July 2016, 477 patients who underwent RFA (n = 314) or LH (n = 163) for HCC tumors meeting the criteria were included. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance for the factors that may affect the choice of treatment.
Results: Collectively, the 1-, 2- and 3-year OS rates were significantly greater after LH than RFA, as well the corresponding RFS rates, before and after PSM by 2:1. However, the RFA group had fewer major complications (P=0.004), shorter postoperative stays (P=0.023) and lower hospital charges (P<0.001) than the LH group. In the subgroup analysis, RFA demonstrated comparable RFS in treating less than 3 cm tumor (P=0.22) located in noncentral bisection (SII, SIII, SVI, SVII) and tumor between 3 cm and 5 cm (P=0.07) located in central bisections (SIV, SV, SVIII). The female, HBV infection, and RFA are factors of worse OS, and the latter two factors also indicated higher RFS.
Conclusions: Though, LH possessed superior intrahepatic control rate than RFA in most condition of tumor smaller than 5 cm, the RFA could be an optimal approach achieved comparable outcomes in patients with centrally located HCC, with fewer major complications, shorter postoperative stays and lower hospital charges.
Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma; Laparoscopic hepatectomy; Propensity score matching; Radiofrequency ablation.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.