Tiffany Ting-Fang Shih1, Jia-Horng Kao2,3, Chih-Horng Wu4,5, Po-Chin Liang4, Tung-Hung Su6, Ming-Chi Lin7, Yu-Hsuan Chang4. 1. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 10002, Taiwan. ttfshih@ntu.edu.tw. 2. Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. kaojh@ntu.edu.tw. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. kaojh@ntu.edu.tw. 4. Department of Medical Imaging and Radiology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, 7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, 10002, Taiwan. 5. Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. 6. Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. 7. Biomedical Technology and Device Research Laboratories, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the standard of care for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the clinical outcomes of iodized oil computed tomography (IoCT) versus ultrasound (US)-guided RFA for HCC remain unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive treatment-naïve patients who received curative RFA for HCC within Milan criteria from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients who underwent either IoCT-guided RFA (IoCT group) or US-guided RFA (US group) were included. Various clinical factors, including tumor location, were adjusted with a 1:1 propensity score matching. Subsequently, the cumulative incidence rates for recurrence and hazard ratios for survival were calculated. RESULTS: We included 184 (37.9%) and 301 (62.1%) patients who received IoCT- and US-guided RFA, respectively. Before propensity score matching, IoCT guidance was significantly associated with multiple tumors, higher body mass index, lower albumin level, and tumors located at S8. After matching, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year local tumor progression rates of the IoCT group were significantly lower than those of the US group (4.4%, 6.9%, and 7.5% vs. 14.4%, 16.3%, and 16.3%, respectively, at p = 0.002, 0.009, and 0.016, respectively). In univariate analyses and multivariate analyses that adjusted for clinical and tumor location-related parameters, the IoCT group had better recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.581, 95% confidence interval 0.375-0.899) than those with US guidance but not overall survival. CONCLUSION: IoCT-guided RFA had a lower local tumor progression rate and better recurrence-free survival than did US-guided RFA for HCC within the Milan criteria. CT-guide RFA is a safe and effective alternative to US-guided with similar overall survival. IoCT-guided RFA might have a better local tumor control than US-guided. IoCT-guided RFA may be more suitable for male patients, aged < 70 years, a single tumor measuring 2-5 cm, and a tumor located at the subdiaphragmatic/subcardiac region.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is the standard of care for early stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the clinical outcomes of iodized oil computed tomography (IoCT) versus ultrasound (US)-guided RFA for HCC remain unclear. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive treatment-naïve patients who received curative RFA for HCC within Milan criteria from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients who underwent either IoCT-guided RFA (IoCT group) or US-guided RFA (US group) were included. Various clinical factors, including tumor location, were adjusted with a 1:1 propensity score matching. Subsequently, the cumulative incidence rates for recurrence and hazard ratios for survival were calculated. RESULTS: We included 184 (37.9%) and 301 (62.1%) patients who received IoCT- and US-guided RFA, respectively. Before propensity score matching, IoCT guidance was significantly associated with multiple tumors, higher body mass index, lower albumin level, and tumors located at S8. After matching, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year local tumor progression rates of the IoCT group were significantly lower than those of the US group (4.4%, 6.9%, and 7.5% vs. 14.4%, 16.3%, and 16.3%, respectively, at p = 0.002, 0.009, and 0.016, respectively). In univariate analyses and multivariate analyses that adjusted for clinical and tumor location-related parameters, the IoCT group had better recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.581, 95% confidence interval 0.375-0.899) than those with US guidance but not overall survival. CONCLUSION: IoCT-guided RFA had a lower local tumor progression rate and better recurrence-free survival than did US-guided RFA for HCC within the Milan criteria. CT-guide RFA is a safe and effective alternative to US-guided with similar overall survival. IoCT-guided RFA might have a better local tumor control than US-guided. IoCT-guided RFA may be more suitable for male patients, aged < 70 years, a single tumor measuring 2-5 cm, and a tumor located at the subdiaphragmatic/subcardiac region.