Recent progress in pulsed electric field ablation for liver cancer

Table 1 Summary of major irreversible electroporation trials for liver cancer

Ref.	Design	Number of patients (lesions)	Tumor type	Tumor size (mm)	Primary efficacy %	Complications	Local recurrence
Kalra et al[16]	Retrospective study	21 (21)	21 HCC	26 (14-40)	100%	42.9% No major complications	24%
Mafeld et al[18]	Bi-institutional retrospective study	52 (59)	20 HCC; 3 cholangiocellular carcinoma; 33 metastatic disease	24 (7-52)	75%	17%	Not reported
Sugimoto et al[19]	Prospective study	5 (6)	6 HCC	17.5 (11.2-23.8)	83%	No serious complications	Not reported
Distelmaier et al[24]	Longitudinal observational diagnostic study	29 (43)	4 HCC; 39 others	6.4 (mL)	93%	Needle tract seeding in 26%, local heating to bile ducts in 24%	5%
Sutter et al[17]	Retrospective single-center study	58 (75)	75 HCC	24 (6-90)	77.3% (the first time); 89.35 (the second time); 92% (the third time)	19%	Not reported
Frühling et al[20]	Single-center nonrandomized clinical study	30 (38)	23 CRLM; 8 HCC; 7 others	24 (0.8–4.0)	78.9% at 3 mo; 65.8% at 6 mo	20.0% minor, 3.3% major complications	21.1% at 3 mo; 34.2% at 6 mo
Niessen et al[88]	Prospective, single-center study	34 (65)	33 HCC; 22 CRLM; 10 others	24 ± 14 (2-71)	94.5%	15.71% minor, 11.79% major complication	13.84%
Eller et al[89]	Prospective study	14 (18)	5 HCC; 11 CRLM; 2 others	20 (11-37)	86%	29%	17%
Cannon et al[90]	Prospective study	44 (48)	14 HCC; 20 CRLM; 10 others	HCC 2.1 (1.3–4.5); CRLM 2.7 (1.2–11); other 2.5 (1.1–5.0)	100%	11.36% (with all complications resolving within 30 d)	Not reported

CRLM: Colorectal liver metastasis; HCC: Hepatocellular carcinoma.