PURPOSE: To compare the embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness of transarterial ethanol ablation (TEA) versus those of chemoembolization and evaluate the correlation between embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness of these treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case-controlled study was undertaken with 30 patients in each group matched based on Child-Pugh grade, tumor characteristics, and performance status. Primary endpoints were embolization efficacy (ie, Lipiodol retention within tumor at 2 months) and treatment effectiveness as evaluated by tumor response, disease progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival. The secondary endpoint was correlation between embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness. RESULTS: Lipiodol retention was greater in the TEA group (89.5% +/- 10.7% vs 47.5% +/- 21.2%; P < .0001). The tumor progression rate at 1 year was higher in the chemoembolization group (five of 30 vs zero of 30; P = .0261). One- and 2-year overall survival rates were higher in the TEA group (93.3% and 80.0%, respectively, vs 73.3% and 43.3%, respectively; P = .0053). One- and 2-year extrahepatic disease progression rates were lower in the TEA group (P = .0002). There were no differences in progression-free survival and intrahepatic disease progression rates at 1 and 2 years. Patients with greater Lipiodol retention (ie, >60%) had better treatment outcomes at 1 year than those with lesser retention, with higher overall survival rates (88.9% vs 66.7%; P = .0192), lower intrahepatic disease progression rates (25.6% vs 59.4%; P = .0169), lower extrahepatic disease progression rates (0.31% vs 35.5%; P = .0047), and higher progression-free survival rates (72.1% vs 36.3%; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: The embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness of TEA are probably superior to those of chemoembolization for HCC.
PURPOSE: To compare the embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness of transarterial ethanol ablation (TEA) versus those of chemoembolization and evaluate the correlation between embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness of these treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A case-controlled study was undertaken with 30 patients in each group matched based on Child-Pugh grade, tumor characteristics, and performance status. Primary endpoints were embolization efficacy (ie, Lipiodolretention within tumor at 2 months) and treatment effectiveness as evaluated by tumor response, disease progression, progression-free survival, and overall survival. The secondary endpoint was correlation between embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness. RESULTS:Lipiodol retention was greater in the TEA group (89.5% +/- 10.7% vs 47.5% +/- 21.2%; P < .0001). The tumor progression rate at 1 year was higher in the chemoembolization group (five of 30 vs zero of 30; P = .0261). One- and 2-year overall survival rates were higher in the TEA group (93.3% and 80.0%, respectively, vs 73.3% and 43.3%, respectively; P = .0053). One- and 2-year extrahepatic disease progression rates were lower in the TEA group (P = .0002). There were no differences in progression-free survival and intrahepatic disease progression rates at 1 and 2 years. Patients with greater Lipiodol retention (ie, >60%) had better treatment outcomes at 1 year than those with lesser retention, with higher overall survival rates (88.9% vs 66.7%; P = .0192), lower intrahepatic disease progression rates (25.6% vs 59.4%; P = .0169), lower extrahepatic disease progression rates (0.31% vs 35.5%; P = .0047), and higher progression-free survival rates (72.1% vs 36.3%; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: The embolization efficacy and treatment effectiveness of TEA are probably superior to those of chemoembolization for HCC.
Authors: Simon Chun Ho Yu; Joyce Wai Yi Hui; Charing Ching Ning Chong; Carmen Chi Min Cho; Sunny Cheung; John Wong; Kit Fai Lee Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 2.740