Radiofrequency ablation versus hepatic resection for breast cancer liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 10 Downloads
To evaluate the comparative therapeutic efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and hepatic resection (HR) for breast cancer liver metastases (BCLMs).
Studies that had examined the outcomes for both RFA and HR for BCLM were identified by searching the electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Pooled analyzes of the overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and short-term outcomes of BCLM were performed.
Patients with BCLM gained many more survival benefits from HR than from RFA with regard to the 3-year OS rate (combined odds ratio (OR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29–0.59, P<0.001), 5-year OS rate (combined OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32–0.46, P<0.001), 3-year DFS (combined OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.27–0.49, P<0.001), and 5-year DFS (combined OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.40–0.66, P<0.001). RFA had fewer postoperative complications (combined OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.20–0.44, P<0.001) and shorter hospital stays (combined OR -9.01, 95% CI -13.49–4.54, P<0.001) than HR.
HR takes precedence over RFA in the treatment of patients with BCLM, considering the better survival rate. RFA gives rise to fewer complications and can be carried out with a shorter hospital stay, compared to HR. RFA should be reserved for patients who are not optimum candidates for resection.
Key wordsBreast cancer liver metastasis Radiofrequency ablation Hepatic resection Prognosis Meta-analysis
首次采用meta分析的方法, 精确评估RFA和HR治疗BCLM的效果, 解决不同研究产生不同结论的矛盾。
关键词乳腺癌肝转移 肝切除术 射频消融 预后 Meta分析
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
We thank all our colleagues from the Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine (Hangzhou, China) for their help and support in this study.
- Lai C, Jin RA, Liang X, et al., 2016. Comparison of laparoscopic hepatectomy, percutaneous radiofrequency ablation and open hepatectomy in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma. J Zhejiang Univ-Sci B (Biomed & Biotechnol), 17(3):236–246. https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B1500322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al., 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 21:6(7):e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097Google Scholar
- Nordmann AJ, Kasenda B, Briel M, 2012. Meta-analyses: what they can and cannot do. Swiss Med Wkly, 142: w13518. https://doi.org/10.4414/smw.2012.13518Google Scholar
- Sato T, Sato S, Kato K, et al., 2006. Two cases of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) therapy for control of liver metastases from breast cancer. Jpn J Cancer Chemother, 33(12):1904–1906 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
- Treska V, Liska V, Skalicky T, et al., 2012. Non-colorectal liver metastases: surgical treatment options. Hepatogastroenterology, 59(113):245–248. https://doi.org/10.5754/hge10292Google Scholar
- Treska V, Cerna M, Liska V, et al., 2014. Surgery for breast cancer liver metastases-factors determining results. Anticancer Res, 34(3):1281–1286.Google Scholar
- Vogl TJ, Emam A, Naguib NN, et al., 2015. How effective are percutaneous liver-directed therapies in patients with non-colorectal liver metastases? Viszeralmedizin, 31(6): 406–413. https://doi.org/10.1159/000440677Google Scholar