Radiofrequency ablation for peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score matching analysis.

IF 4.1 2区医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING

Insights into Imaging Pub Date : 2025-02-19 DOI:10.1186/s13244-025-01919-5

Jin Cui, Xinzi Sui, Kaiwen Liu, Min Huang, Yuanwen Zheng, Xinya Zhao, Gongzheng Wang, Ximing Wang

{"title":"Radiofrequency ablation for peribiliary hepatocellular carcinoma: propensity score matching analysis.","authors":"Jin Cui, Xinzi Sui, Kaiwen Liu, Min Huang, Yuanwen Zheng, Xinya Zhao, Gongzheng Wang, Ximing Wang","doi":"10.1186/s13244-025-01919-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":13639,"journal":{"name":"Insights into Imaging","volume":"16 1","pages":"45"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11839967/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Insights into Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-025-01919-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

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.

查看原文本刊更多论文

射频消融治疗胆道周围肝癌：倾向评分匹配分析。

目的：目前，对于胆道周围肝细胞癌（HCC）的射频消融（RFA）治疗尚无既定的临床指南。因此，本研究的目的是比较RFA治疗胆道周围和非胆道周围HCC的长期疗效。方法：本回顾性研究纳入了282例2013年2月至2021年5月期间接受RFA治疗的胆道周围HCC （n = 109）或非胆道周围HCC （n = 173）患者。比较倾向评分匹配（PSM）前后的局部肿瘤进展（LTP）、总生存（OS）、无病生存（DFS）和并发症。结果：在PSM前，5年LTP率（26.3% vs. 23.6%, p = 0.602）、OS率（56.6% vs. 68.0%, p = 0.586）和DFS率（22.9% vs. 25.7%, p = 0.239）在胆道周围组和非胆道周围组之间无显著差异。PSM后，1年、3年和5年LTP率（分别为13.0%、23.1%和26.3%，分别为12.1%、25.1%和28.2%,p = 0.857）、OS率（97.2%、73.5%和56.6%，分别为95.3%、79.5%和70.6%,p = 0.727）和DFS率（59.4%、29.4%和22.9%，分别为64.2%、33.1%和23.8%,p = 0.568）在胆道周围组和非胆道周围组之间无显著差异。对于LTP （p = 0.622）或OS (p = 0.587)，胆周位置不是一个重要的预后因素。此外，轻度肝内胆管扩张在胆周组更常见（9.2%比2.8%,p = 0.045）。结论：RFA治疗围肝细胞癌和非围肝细胞癌的远期疗效相似。RFA是治疗胆道周围肝癌的可行选择。关键相关性声明：射频消融（RFA）后的局部肿瘤进展（LTP）、总生存（OS）和无病生存（DFS）率在胆道周围和非胆道周围肝细胞癌（HCC）中相似。重点：目前对于胆道周围型肝细胞癌（HCC）的射频消融（RFA）尚无临床指南。对于胆道周围和非胆道周围HCC， RFA后的局部肿瘤进展、总生存期和无病生存期相似。RFA是治疗胆道周围肝细胞癌的可行选择。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Insights into Imaging Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

CiteScore

7.30

自引率

4.30%

发文量

182

审稿时长

13 weeks

期刊介绍： Insights into Imaging (I³) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen. All content published in the journal is freely available online to anyone, anywhere! I³ continuously updates scientific knowledge and progress in best-practice standards in radiology through the publication of original articles and state-of-the-art reviews and opinions, along with recommendations and statements from the leading radiological societies in Europe. Founded by the European Society of Radiology (ESR), I³ creates a platform for educational material, guidelines and recommendations, and a forum for topics of controversy. A balanced combination of review articles, original papers, short communications from European radiological congresses and information on society matters makes I³ an indispensable source for current information in this field. I³ is owned by the ESR, however authors retain copyright to their article according to the Creative Commons Attribution License (see Copyright and License Agreement). All articles can be read, redistributed and reused for free, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly. The open access fees (article-processing charges) for this journal are kindly sponsored by ESR for all Members. The journal went open access in 2012, which means that all articles published since then are freely available online.