射频消融与微波消融治疗结直肠肝转移瘤:回顾性队列手术经验的长期结果。

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-11 DOI:10.21037/hbsn-23-677
Ali Gunduz Sarioglu, Chase J Wehrle, Ege Akgun, Arturan Ibrahimli, James F Bena, Eren Berber
{"title":"射频消融与微波消融治疗结直肠肝转移瘤:回顾性队列手术经验的长期结果。","authors":"Ali Gunduz Sarioglu, Chase J Wehrle, Ege Akgun, Arturan Ibrahimli, James F Bena, Eren Berber","doi":"10.21037/hbsn-23-677","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ablation is an alternative treatment modality for selected patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). Although initially widely performed via radiofrequency ablation (RFA), more recently, microwave ablation (MWA) is being preferred due to its perceived superiority in creating the ablation zones. The aim of this study is to compare the long-term efficacy of these two modalities performed surgically.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing surgical liver ablation from 2005-2023 at a tertiary center by a single surgeon for CRLM were included in a retrospective institutional review board-approved study. Outcomes were compared using Wilcoxon, Chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox multivariate regression analyses. Continuous data are presented as median (interquartile range).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were a total of 242 patients. Laparoscopic RFA was done in 121 patients with 303 lesions and laparoscopic MWA in 121 patients with 300 lesions. There was no difference between the groups regarding operative time (161 <i>vs.</i> 147 minutes, respectively, P=0.4), perioperative morbidity (3% <i>vs.</i> 8%, respectively, P=0.2) or hospital stay (1 <i>vs.</i> 1 day, P=0.05). Local recurrence (LR) per lesion with at least 1 year of imaging follow-up was 29% in the RFA and 13% in the MWA group (P<0.001). Based on univariate survival analysis, tumor size, blood vessel proximity, ablation margin, and ablation modality were independent predictors of LR. To control these variables, direct matching was performed. Each cohort included 189 lesions. Kaplan-Meier analysis of these cohorts showed increased LR-free survival in the MWA group <i>vs.</i> the RFA group (P=0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This large study confirms our initial observation that local tumor control rate is better after MWA <i>vs</i>. RFA.</p>","PeriodicalId":12878,"journal":{"name":"Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition","volume":"13 5","pages":"759-770"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534792/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiofrequency ablation versus microwave ablation for colorectal liver metastases: long-term results of a retrospective cohort surgical experience.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Gunduz Sarioglu, Chase J Wehrle, Ege Akgun, Arturan Ibrahimli, James F Bena, Eren Berber\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/hbsn-23-677\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ablation is an alternative treatment modality for selected patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). Although initially widely performed via radiofrequency ablation (RFA), more recently, microwave ablation (MWA) is being preferred due to its perceived superiority in creating the ablation zones. The aim of this study is to compare the long-term efficacy of these two modalities performed surgically.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing surgical liver ablation from 2005-2023 at a tertiary center by a single surgeon for CRLM were included in a retrospective institutional review board-approved study. Outcomes were compared using Wilcoxon, Chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox multivariate regression analyses. Continuous data are presented as median (interquartile range).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were a total of 242 patients. Laparoscopic RFA was done in 121 patients with 303 lesions and laparoscopic MWA in 121 patients with 300 lesions. There was no difference between the groups regarding operative time (161 <i>vs.</i> 147 minutes, respectively, P=0.4), perioperative morbidity (3% <i>vs.</i> 8%, respectively, P=0.2) or hospital stay (1 <i>vs.</i> 1 day, P=0.05). Local recurrence (LR) per lesion with at least 1 year of imaging follow-up was 29% in the RFA and 13% in the MWA group (P<0.001). Based on univariate survival analysis, tumor size, blood vessel proximity, ablation margin, and ablation modality were independent predictors of LR. To control these variables, direct matching was performed. Each cohort included 189 lesions. Kaplan-Meier analysis of these cohorts showed increased LR-free survival in the MWA group <i>vs.</i> the RFA group (P=0.005).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This large study confirms our initial observation that local tumor control rate is better after MWA <i>vs</i>. RFA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12878,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition\",\"volume\":\"13 5\",\"pages\":\"759-770\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534792/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/hbsn-23-677\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/hbsn-23-677","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:消融术是针对特定结直肠肝转移(CRLM)患者的一种替代治疗方式。虽然最初广泛采用的是射频消融术(RFA),但最近人们更倾向于采用微波消融术(MWA),因为微波消融术在创建消融区方面被认为更具优势。本研究旨在比较这两种手术方式的长期疗效:一项经机构审查委员会批准的回顾性研究纳入了2005-2023年期间在一家三级医疗中心由一名外科医生对CRLM进行手术肝消融的患者。采用Wilcoxon、Chi-square、Kaplan-Meier和Cox多变量回归分析对结果进行比较。连续数据以中位数(四分位数间距)表示:共有 242 名患者。121名患者的303个病灶接受了腹腔镜RFA治疗,121名患者的300个病灶接受了腹腔镜MWA治疗。两组患者的手术时间(分别为161分钟和147分钟,P=0.4)、围术期发病率(分别为3%和8%,P=0.2)或住院时间(分别为1天和1天,P=0.05)均无差异。在至少1年的影像随访中,RFA组每个病灶的局部复发率(LR)为29%,MWA组为13%(Pvs.RFA组,P=0.005):这项大型研究证实了我们最初的观察结果,即 MWA 与 RFA 相比,局部肿瘤控制率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Radiofrequency ablation versus microwave ablation for colorectal liver metastases: long-term results of a retrospective cohort surgical experience.

Background: Ablation is an alternative treatment modality for selected patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs). Although initially widely performed via radiofrequency ablation (RFA), more recently, microwave ablation (MWA) is being preferred due to its perceived superiority in creating the ablation zones. The aim of this study is to compare the long-term efficacy of these two modalities performed surgically.

Methods: Patients undergoing surgical liver ablation from 2005-2023 at a tertiary center by a single surgeon for CRLM were included in a retrospective institutional review board-approved study. Outcomes were compared using Wilcoxon, Chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox multivariate regression analyses. Continuous data are presented as median (interquartile range).

Results: There were a total of 242 patients. Laparoscopic RFA was done in 121 patients with 303 lesions and laparoscopic MWA in 121 patients with 300 lesions. There was no difference between the groups regarding operative time (161 vs. 147 minutes, respectively, P=0.4), perioperative morbidity (3% vs. 8%, respectively, P=0.2) or hospital stay (1 vs. 1 day, P=0.05). Local recurrence (LR) per lesion with at least 1 year of imaging follow-up was 29% in the RFA and 13% in the MWA group (P<0.001). Based on univariate survival analysis, tumor size, blood vessel proximity, ablation margin, and ablation modality were independent predictors of LR. To control these variables, direct matching was performed. Each cohort included 189 lesions. Kaplan-Meier analysis of these cohorts showed increased LR-free survival in the MWA group vs. the RFA group (P=0.005).

Conclusions: This large study confirms our initial observation that local tumor control rate is better after MWA vs. RFA.

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
自引率
10.00%
发文量
392
期刊介绍: Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition (HBSN) is a bi-monthly, open-access, peer-reviewed journal (Print ISSN: 2304-3881; Online ISSN: 2304-389X) since December 2012. The journal focuses on hepatopancreatobiliary disease and nutrition, aiming to present new findings and deliver up-to-date, practical information on diagnosis, prevention, and clinical investigations. Areas of interest cover surgical techniques, clinical and basic research, transplantation, therapies, NASH, NAFLD, targeted drugs, gut microbiota, metabolism, cancer immunity, genomics, and nutrition and dietetics. HBSN serves as a valuable resource for professionals seeking insights into diverse aspects of hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition.
期刊最新文献
Risk stratification prior to major hepatectomy. Robotic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a new dawn? Should we resect distant metastases?-reconsidering radical resection of pancreatic cancer with liver metastases. Simulating the in vivo tumor microenvironment-advances in building a vascularized model of hepatocellular carcinoma through 3D bioprinting. Surgical resection of isolated pancreatic metastatic malignant melanoma.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1