Literature DB >> 22752100

Pain analysis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation-initial observations.

Govindarajan Narayanan1, Tatiana Froud, Kaming Lo, Katuska J Barbery, Evelyn Perez-Rojas, Jose Yrizarry.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare the postprocedure pain of hepatocellular carcinoma treated with irreversible electroporation (IRE) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA).
METHODS: This Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, institutional review board-approved study compared postprocedure pain in 21 patients (15 men, six women; mean age 61.5 years) who underwent IRE of 29 intrahepatic lesions (mean size 2.20 cm) in 28 IRE sessions with 22 patients (16 men, six women; mean age 60.2 years) who underwent RFA of 27 lesions (mean size 3.38 cm) in 25 RFA sessions. Pain was determined by patient-disclosed scores with an 11-point numerical rating scale and 24 h cumulative hydromorphone use from patient-controlled analgesia pump. Complications were noted. Statistical significance was evaluated by Fisher's exact test, the Chi-square test, and Student's t test.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the cumulative hydromorphone dose (1.54 mg (IRE) vs. 1.24 mg (RFA); P = 0.52) and in the mean pain score (1.96 (IRE) vs. 2.25 (RFA); P = 0.70). In nine (32.14 %) of 28 IRE sessions and 11 (44.0 %) of 25 RFA sessions, patients reported no pain. Complications occurred in three (10.7 %) of 28 IRE treatments and included pneumothorax (n = 1), pleural effusion (n = 1), and bleeding in the form of hemothorax (n = 1); one (4 %) of 25 RFA treatments included burn.
CONCLUSION: IRE is comparable to RFA in the amount of pain that patients experience and the amount of pain medication self-administered. Both modalities were well tolerated by patients. Prospective, randomized trials are necessary to further evaluate these findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22752100     DOI: 10.1007/s00270-012-0426-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol        ISSN: 0174-1551            Impact factor:   2.740


  16 in total

1.  Locoregional treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma: The best is yet to come.

Authors:  Naveen Kalra; Pankaj Gupta; Yogesh Chawla; Niranjan Khandelwal
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2015-10-28

Review 2.  Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Andreas Karagiannis; John Varkarakis
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Image-guided tumor ablation: standardization of terminology and reporting criteria--a 10-year update.

Authors:  Muneeb Ahmed; Luigi Solbiati; Christopher L Brace; David J Breen; Matthew R Callstrom; J William Charboneau; Min-Hua Chen; Byung Ihn Choi; Thierry de Baère; Gerald D Dodd; Damian E Dupuy; Debra A Gervais; David Gianfelice; Alice R Gillams; Fred T Lee; Edward Leen; Riccardo Lencioni; Peter J Littrup; Tito Livraghi; David S Lu; John P McGahan; Maria Franca Meloni; Boris Nikolic; Philippe L Pereira; Ping Liang; Hyunchul Rhim; Steven C Rose; Riad Salem; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Stephen B Solomon; Michael C Soulen; Masatoshi Tanaka; Thomas J Vogl; Bradford J Wood; S Nahum Goldberg
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2014-10-23       Impact factor: 3.464

4.  Risk of local failure after ultrasound guided irreversible electroporation of malignant liver tumors.

Authors:  Robert M Eisele; Sascha S Chopra; Matthias Glanemann; Bernhard Gebauer
Journal:  Interv Med Appl Sci       Date:  2014-12-22

5.  Percutaneous Ablation of Hepatic Tumors at the Hepatocaval Confluence Using Irreversible Electroporation: A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Tiankuan Li; Wei Huang; Zhiyuan Wu; Yong Wang; Qingbing Wang; Ziyin Wang; Qin Liu; Jingjing Liu; Shenjie Wang; Xiaoyi Ding; Zhongmin Wang
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2022-05-31       Impact factor: 3.109

Review 6.  Irreversible electroporation of hepatic malignancy.

Authors:  Govindarajan Narayanan; Tatiana Froud; Rekhaben Suthar; Katuska Barbery
Journal:  Semin Intervent Radiol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.513

Review 7.  Mechanisms of cryoablation: clinical consequences on malignant tumors.

Authors:  J G Baust; A A Gage; T E Bjerklund Johansen; J M Baust
Journal:  Cryobiology       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 2.487

8.  Bursts of Bipolar Microsecond Pulses Inhibit Tumor Growth.

Authors:  Michael B Sano; Christopher B Arena; Katelyn R Bittleman; Matthew R DeWitt; Hyung J Cho; Christopher S Szot; Dieter Saur; James M Cissell; John Robertson; Yong W Lee; Rafael V Davalos
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 9.  Evolving ablative therapies for hepatic malignancy.

Authors:  Smit Singla; Steven N Hochwald; Boris Kuvshinoff
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Irreversible electroporation of the liver: is there a safe limit to the ablation volume?

Authors:  P Sánchez-Velázquez; Q Castellví; A Villanueva; R Quesada; C Pañella; M Cáceres; D Dorcaratto; A Andaluz; X Moll; M Trujillo; J M Burdío; E Berjano; L Grande; A Ivorra; F Burdío
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.