微波消融与射频消融治疗以实性为主的良性甲状腺结节:随机对照试验

IF 12.1 1区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Radiology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1148/radiol.232162
Sitong Chen, Jianping Dou, Yuancheng Cang, Ying Che, Gang Dong, Chunlai Zhang, Dong Xu, Qinxian Long, Jie Yu, Ping Liang
{"title":"微波消融与射频消融治疗以实性为主的良性甲状腺结节:随机对照试验","authors":"Sitong Chen, Jianping Dou, Yuancheng Cang, Ying Che, Gang Dong, Chunlai Zhang, Dong Xu, Qinxian Long, Jie Yu, Ping Liang","doi":"10.1148/radiol.232162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background Current guidelines recommend radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as the first-line treatment for benign thyroid nodules. Purpose To compare the efficacy and safety of microwave ablation (MWA) and RFA for the treatment of predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules. Materials and Methods This prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter study was conducted from August 2019 to February 2023. Participants with nonfunctioning, predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules from five institutions were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio to receive MWA or RFA treatment. Participants were followed up for at least 2 years. Primary outcomes were 6-month and 2-year volume reduction rate (VRR) of nodules after ablation. Secondary outcomes included VRR change over time, complications, and technique efficacy (defined as volumetric reduction ≥ 50% of the initial nodule volume). Continuous variables and categorical variables were compared using the <i>t</i> test and the χ<sup>2</sup> test or Fisher exact test, respectively. Results This study included 76 participants in the MWA group (mean age, 46 years ± 12 [SD]; 58 female participants) and 76 in the RFA group (mean age, 50 years ± 13; 56 female participants). MWA was noninferior to RFA in terms of 6-month (mean difference, -5.6%; <i>P</i> = .01) and 2-year (-2.4%; <i>P</i> < .001) VRR after ablation. Comparing MWA and RFA, no evidence of a difference was observed for VRR change over time (mean difference from mixed-effects analysis, 6.9% [95% CI: -0.5, 13.9]; <i>P</i> = .73) or technique efficacy (91% vs 86%; <i>P</i> = .40). The most common major complication was voice change, which occurred in 6.6% of participants in the MWA group and 1.3% of participants in the RFA group (<i>P</i> = .21). Conclusion MWA and RFA showed comparable efficacy for treating participants with predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules. However, a larger sample size is needed to demonstrate that safety is comparable between the procedures. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04046354 © RSNA, 2024 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> See also the editorial by McGahan in this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":20896,"journal":{"name":"Radiology","volume":"313 1","pages":"e232162"},"PeriodicalIF":12.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Microwave versus Radiofrequency Ablation in Treating Predominantly Solid Benign Thyroid Nodules: A Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Sitong Chen, Jianping Dou, Yuancheng Cang, Ying Che, Gang Dong, Chunlai Zhang, Dong Xu, Qinxian Long, Jie Yu, Ping Liang\",\"doi\":\"10.1148/radiol.232162\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Background Current guidelines recommend radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as the first-line treatment for benign thyroid nodules. Purpose To compare the efficacy and safety of microwave ablation (MWA) and RFA for the treatment of predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules. Materials and Methods This prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter study was conducted from August 2019 to February 2023. Participants with nonfunctioning, predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules from five institutions were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio to receive MWA or RFA treatment. Participants were followed up for at least 2 years. Primary outcomes were 6-month and 2-year volume reduction rate (VRR) of nodules after ablation. Secondary outcomes included VRR change over time, complications, and technique efficacy (defined as volumetric reduction ≥ 50% of the initial nodule volume). Continuous variables and categorical variables were compared using the <i>t</i> test and the χ<sup>2</sup> test or Fisher exact test, respectively. Results This study included 76 participants in the MWA group (mean age, 46 years ± 12 [SD]; 58 female participants) and 76 in the RFA group (mean age, 50 years ± 13; 56 female participants). MWA was noninferior to RFA in terms of 6-month (mean difference, -5.6%; <i>P</i> = .01) and 2-year (-2.4%; <i>P</i> < .001) VRR after ablation. Comparing MWA and RFA, no evidence of a difference was observed for VRR change over time (mean difference from mixed-effects analysis, 6.9% [95% CI: -0.5, 13.9]; <i>P</i> = .73) or technique efficacy (91% vs 86%; <i>P</i> = .40). The most common major complication was voice change, which occurred in 6.6% of participants in the MWA group and 1.3% of participants in the RFA group (<i>P</i> = .21). Conclusion MWA and RFA showed comparable efficacy for treating participants with predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules. However, a larger sample size is needed to demonstrate that safety is comparable between the procedures. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04046354 © RSNA, 2024 <i>Supplemental material is available for this article.</i> See also the editorial by McGahan in this issue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiology\",\"volume\":\"313 1\",\"pages\":\"e232162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":12.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.232162\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.232162","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

背景 目前的指南推荐将射频消融(RFA)作为良性甲状腺结节的一线治疗方法。目的 比较微波消融术(MWA)和射频消融术治疗以实性为主的良性甲状腺结节的有效性和安全性。材料与方法 该前瞻性、随机、开放标签、多中心研究于 2019 年 8 月至 2023 年 2 月进行。来自五家机构的无功能、以实性为主的良性甲状腺结节参与者按 1:1 的比例随机分配接受 MWA 或 RFA 治疗。对参与者进行了至少 2 年的随访。主要结果是消融后 6 个月和 2 年的结节体积缩小率 (VRR)。次要结果包括 VRR 随时间的变化、并发症和技术疗效(定义为体积缩小≥初始结节体积的 50%)。连续变量和分类变量的比较分别采用 t 检验和 χ2 检验或费雪精确检验。研究结果 MWA 组 76 人(平均年龄 46 岁 ± 12 [SD];女性 58 人),RFA 组 76 人(平均年龄 50 岁 ± 13;女性 56 人)。就消融后 6 个月(平均差异为 -5.6%;P = .01)和 2 年(-2.4%;P < .001)的 VRR 而言,MWA 并不比 RFA 差。比较 MWA 和 RFA,没有证据表明 VRR 随时间的变化而变化(混合效应分析的平均差异为 6.9% [95% CI:-0.5, 13.9];P = .73)或技术疗效(91% vs 86%;P = .40)存在差异。最常见的主要并发症是变声,MWA 组有 6.6% 的参与者发生了变声,RFA 组有 1.3% 的参与者发生了变声(P = .21)。结论 MWA 和 RFA 对治疗以实性良性甲状腺结节为主的参试者的疗效相当。但是,要证明两种方法的安全性相当,还需要更大的样本量。ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT04046354 © RSNA, 2024 本文有补充材料。另请参阅本期 McGahan 的社论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Microwave versus Radiofrequency Ablation in Treating Predominantly Solid Benign Thyroid Nodules: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background Current guidelines recommend radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as the first-line treatment for benign thyroid nodules. Purpose To compare the efficacy and safety of microwave ablation (MWA) and RFA for the treatment of predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules. Materials and Methods This prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter study was conducted from August 2019 to February 2023. Participants with nonfunctioning, predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules from five institutions were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio to receive MWA or RFA treatment. Participants were followed up for at least 2 years. Primary outcomes were 6-month and 2-year volume reduction rate (VRR) of nodules after ablation. Secondary outcomes included VRR change over time, complications, and technique efficacy (defined as volumetric reduction ≥ 50% of the initial nodule volume). Continuous variables and categorical variables were compared using the t test and the χ2 test or Fisher exact test, respectively. Results This study included 76 participants in the MWA group (mean age, 46 years ± 12 [SD]; 58 female participants) and 76 in the RFA group (mean age, 50 years ± 13; 56 female participants). MWA was noninferior to RFA in terms of 6-month (mean difference, -5.6%; P = .01) and 2-year (-2.4%; P < .001) VRR after ablation. Comparing MWA and RFA, no evidence of a difference was observed for VRR change over time (mean difference from mixed-effects analysis, 6.9% [95% CI: -0.5, 13.9]; P = .73) or technique efficacy (91% vs 86%; P = .40). The most common major complication was voice change, which occurred in 6.6% of participants in the MWA group and 1.3% of participants in the RFA group (P = .21). Conclusion MWA and RFA showed comparable efficacy for treating participants with predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules. However, a larger sample size is needed to demonstrate that safety is comparable between the procedures. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04046354 © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by McGahan in this issue.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Radiology
Radiology 医学-核医学
CiteScore
35.20
自引率
3.00%
发文量
596
审稿时长
3.6 months
期刊介绍: Published regularly since 1923 by the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), Radiology has long been recognized as the authoritative reference for the most current, clinically relevant and highest quality research in the field of radiology. Each month the journal publishes approximately 240 pages of peer-reviewed original research, authoritative reviews, well-balanced commentary on significant articles, and expert opinion on new techniques and technologies. Radiology publishes cutting edge and impactful imaging research articles in radiology and medical imaging in order to help improve human health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信