Resection Plus Post-operative Adjuvant Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization (TACE) Compared with Resection Alone for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 572-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya Ruth Huo ◽  
Michael Vinchill Chan ◽  
Christine Chan
2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 883-891 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya-Qing Zhang ◽  
Fei Zhao ◽  
Lei Song ◽  
Hong-Yun Gan ◽  
Xiao-Feng Xie

Many studies have investigated the efficacy of Endostar combined with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) versus TACE alone for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of Endostar. PubMed, Embase, and other databases were searched, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Nine studies, all of which were clinical randomized controlled trials, involving 411 participants were included. The overall response rate, disease control rate and α-fetoprotein negative conversion ratio, and the 6- and 12-month survival rate of HCC patients treated with combined Endostar and TACE were higher than those treated with TACE alone ( P < .01). Furthermore, the incidence of tumor progression was low after Endostar treatment ( P = .005). The incidence of adverse effects (leukocytopenia, liver function damage, and vomiting) was similar in Endostar with TACE and in TACE alone ( P > .05). However, large studies and more randomized trials are necessary to determine the effects of Endostar on HCC.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuang Jiang ◽  
Gong Cheng ◽  
Mingheng Liao ◽  
Jiwei Huang

Abstract Background There is still some debate as to whether transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is better than TACE or RFA alone. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of TACE plus RFA for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with RFA or TACE alone. Methods We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for all relevant randomized controlled trials and retrospective studies reporting overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and complications of TACE plus RFA for HCC, compared with RFA or TACE alone. Results Twenty-one studies involving 3413 patients were included. TACE combined with RFA was associated with better OS (hazard ratio [HR]=0.62, 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.55–0.71, P < 0.001) and RFS (HR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.39–0.69, P < 0.001) than TACE alone; compared with RFA alone, TACE plus RFA resulted in longer OS (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.53–0.75, P < 0.001) and RFS (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.51–0.71, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses by tumor size also showed that combined treatment resulted in better OS and RFS compared with RFA alone in patients with HCC larger than 3 cm. Combined treatment resulted in similar rate of major complications compared with TACE or RFA alone (OR = 1.78, 95% CI = 0.99–3.20, P = 0.05; OR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.42–2.38, P = 1.00, respectively). Conclusions TACE combined with RFA was more effective for HCC than TACE alone. For patients with a tumor larger than 3 cm, the combined treatment also achieved a better effect than RFA alone.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document