Radiofrequency ablation for peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score matching analysis
Abstract Objectives At present, there are no established clinical guidelines for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of RFA for peribiliary vs. non-peribiliary HCC. Methods This retrospect...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | Insights into Imaging |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-01919-5 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Objectives At present, there are no established clinical guidelines for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of RFA for peribiliary vs. non-peribiliary HCC. Methods This retrospective study included 282 patients with peribiliary HCC (n = 109) or non-peribiliary HCC (n = 173) who received RFA between February 2013 and May 2021. Local tumor progression (LTP), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and complications were compared before and after propensity score matching (PSM). Results Before PSM, there were no significant differences in 5-year LTP rates (26.3% vs. 23.6%, p = 0.602), OS rates (56.6% vs. 68.0%, p = 0.586), or DFS rates (22.9% vs. 25.7%, p = 0.239) between the peribiliary and non-peribiliary groups. After PSM, there were no significant differences in the 1-, 3-, and 5-year LTP rates (13.0%, 23.1%, and 26.3% vs. 12.1%, 25.1%, and 28.2%, respectively, p = 0.857), OS rates (97.2%, 73.5%, and 56.6% vs. 95.3%, 79.5%, and 70.6%, p = 0.727), or DFS rates (59.4%, 29.4%, and 22.9% vs. 64.2%, 33.1%, and 23.8%, p = 0.568) between the peribiliary non-peribiliary groups. Peribiliary location was not a significant prognostic factor for LTP (p = 0.622) or OS (p = 0.587). In addition, mild intrahepatic bile duct dilatation was more frequent in the peribiliary group (9.2% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.045). Conclusion Long-term outcomes of RFA were similar for peribiliary and non-peribiliary HCC. RFA is a viable alternative for treatment of peribiliary HCC. Critical relevance statement The local tumor progression (LTP), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) rates after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) were similar for peribiliary and non-peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Key Points There are currently no clinical guidelines for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Local tumor progression, overall survival, and disease-free survival after RFA were similar for peribiliary and non-peribiliary HCC. RFA is a viable alternative for the treatment of peribiliary HCC. Graphical Abstract |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1869-4101 |