Published online Feb 7, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i5.1554
Peer-review started: May 18, 2014
First decision: June 27, 2014
Revised: July 29, 2014
Accepted: September 19, 2014
Article in press: September 19, 2014
Published online: February 7, 2015
Processing time: 267 Days and 21.8 Hours
AIM: To investigate the treatment strategies and long-term outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in difficult locations and to compare the results with non-difficult HCC.
METHODS: From 2004 to 2012, a total of 470 HCC patients underwent ultrasound-guided percutaneous RFA. Among these HCC patients, 382 with tumors located ≤ 5 mm from a major vessel/bile duct (n = 87), from peripheral important structures (n = 232) or from the liver capsule (n = 63) were regarded as difficult cases. There were 331 male patients and 51 female patients, with an average age of 55.3 ± 10.1 years old. A total of 235 and 147 patients had Child-Pugh class A and class B liver function, respectively. The average tumor size was 3.4 ± 1.2 cm. Individual treatment strategies were developed to treat these difficult cases. During the same period, 88 HCC patients with tumors that were not in difficult locations served as the control group. In the control group, 74 patients were male, and 14 patients were female, with an average age of 57.4 ± 11.8 years old. Of these, 62 patients and 26 patients had Child-Pugh class A and class B liver function, respectively. Regular follow-up after RFA was performed to assess treatment efficacy. Survival results were generated from Kaplan-Meier estimates, and multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox regression model.
RESULTS: Early tumor necrosis rate in the difficult group was similar to that in the control group (97.6% vs 94.3%, P = 0.080). The complication rate in the difficult group was significantly higher than that in the control group (4.9% vs 0.8%, P = 0.041). The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 116 mo, with an average of 28 ± 22.4 mo. Local progression rate in the difficult group was significantly higher than that in the control group (12.7% vs 7.1%, P = 0.046). However, the 1-, 3-, 5-, and 7-year overall survival rates in the difficult group were not significantly different from those in the control group (84.3%, 54.4%, 41.2%, and 29.9% vs 92.5%, 60.3%, 43.2%, and 32.8%, respectively, P = 0.371). Additionally, a multivariate analysis revealed that tumor location was not a significant risk factor for survival.
CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in long-term overall survival between the two groups even though the local progression rate was higher in the difficult group.
Core tip: Recently, many studies have reported the increasing treatment success rate and reduced frequency of complications following RFA treatment of tumors in difficult locations. However, the long-term outcomes of patients with tumors in difficult locations have been rarely reported. Our studies showed no difference in 5- or 7-year overall survival between the difficult location group and the control group even though the local progression rate was higher in the difficult group. These results highlight that optimized individual strategies could achieve acceptable efficacy and safety and could help to expand RFA indications and improve overall outcome.