277
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Irreversible electroporation versus radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: a single centre propensity-matched comparison

ORCID Icon, , , , , & show all
Pages 942-947 | Received 21 Feb 2021, Accepted 07 May 2021, Published online: 30 May 2021
 

Abstract

Background and aims

Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a relatively new non-thermal ablative method for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to compare the longer-term efficacy of IRE to the standard thermal technique of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in HCC.

Methods

All patients who underwent IRE or RFA for HCC in our centre were identified and demographic and clinical data were analysed up until 1st March, 2020. Local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) was compared between groups after propensity score matching for age, gender, Child–Pugh grade, BCLC stage, lesion size and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level.

Results

A total of 190 HCC ablations (31 IRE and 159 RFA) were identified. After propensity score matching, we compared 25 IRE procedures (76% males, median age 62.4 years, median tumour size 20 mm) to 96 RFA procedures (84.4% males, median age 64.3 years, median tumour size 18.5 mm). LRFS did not differ between groups, with a 1-, 2- and 5-year LRFS of 80.4% (95% CI 55.8–92.2), 69.1% (95% CI 43.3–84.9) and 44.9% (95% CI 18.9–68.1%), respectively for IRE and 84.8% (95% CI 75.2–90.9), 71.3% (95% CI 58.3–81.0) and 52.1% (95% CI 35.4–66.4%), respectively for RFA (p = .63). There were no major procedure-related complications or deaths in either group.

Conclusions

Whilst IRE remains a relatively novel therapy for HCC cases where standard thermal ablation is contraindicated, the LRFS in our centre is comparable to that of RFA. IRE should therefore be considered as a treatment option in such cases when available before stage-migration to non-curative therapies such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).

Authors’ contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. EF and AM analyzed data. EF developed the primary manuscript draft. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethical approval

The study protocol was approved by the Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee (Project No: 163/20).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The datasets generated during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.