AI Article Synopsis

  • RFA (Radiofrequency Ablation) is effective for localized tumor destruction in patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases who are not candidates for surgery, but studies show it may be less effective than hepatic resection.
  • A study compared outcomes of patients undergoing RFA versus repeat hepatic resection, finding no significant differences in liver function, complication rates, or long-term survival.
  • Overall, both treatments present viable options, but RFA has the advantage of lower complications, making it a safe choice for certain patients.

Article Abstract

Background: RFA is designed to produce localized tumor destruction by heating the tumor and surrounding liver tissue, especially suitable for patients who do not qualify for hepatic resection. Many studies have reported that RFA was inferior to hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent colorectal liver metastases. However, strong evidence is lacking in the literature. This study aimed to investigate the effect and clinical outcome of percutaneous ultrasound-guided RFA and repeat hepatic resection for recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy.

Methods: From January 2007 to January 2014, 194 patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy diagnosed in our hospital was performed, and then divided into two groups based on different regimens: repeat hepatic resection group and RFA group. The clinical data of the two groups were analyzed. After treatment, the liver function-related indexes, complication rate, survival rate, and tumor recurrence of the two groups were recorded. The difference in short-term and long-term effects between repeat hepatic resection and RFA was identified by propensity score analysis.

Results: The number of metastases and the proportion of left and right lobe involved by tumor and preoperative chemotherapy in the RFA group were higher than those in the repeat hepatic resection group. The clinical data showed no significant difference between the two groups after using propensity score analysis. Compared with the RFA group, the liver function of the repeat hepatic resection group was significantly improved. After adjustment for potential confounders, no significant difference in liver function-related indexes was found between RFA and repeat hepatic resection, and the incidence of complications in the RFA group was lower. In survival analysis, there was no significant difference in OS and DFS between the two groups.

Conclusions: RFA is a safe and effective therapeutic option for patients with recurrent colorectal liver metastases after hepatectomy.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171833PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01849-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

hepatic resection
28
repeat hepatic
24
recurrent colorectal
20
colorectal liver
20
liver metastases
20
rfa group
16
metastases hepatectomy
12
resection group
12
rfa
10
liver
9

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!