Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Radiofrequency Ablation for Breast Cancer Smaller Than 2 cm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of breast cancer smaller than 2 cm.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in the PubMed and EMBASE databases to identify published studies investigating the efficacy and safety of RFA for breast cancer smaller than 2 cm. The main outcomes were technical success rate of the ablation, complete ablation rate, complications and local recurrence. Secondary considerations were mode of anesthesia, pain tolerance, mean ablation time and surgical excision after ablation.

Results

Seventeen studies involving 399 patients and 401 lesions met the inclusion criteria. Nearly 99%(95%CI=0.98-1.00) of lesions achieved good technical success rate.Notably, 83.88% of the patients received RFA under general anesthesia (333/397) whereas 15.87% received RFA under local anesthesia (63/397). Of the 63, 98.41% tolerated the pain associated with the procedure. Majority of patients (65.74%, 261/397) underwent surgical excision of the tumor after ablation whereas in a few patients (34.26%, 136/397), the tumor tissue was retained in the breast after ablation. Complete ablation was achieved in 96% of patients for a mean time of 15.8 minutes (95%CI=0.93-0.99). Overall, only 2% (95%CI=0.01-0.04) of the individuals developed complications. Skin burns (2.02%, 8/397) were the most common complications. There was no local recurrence after a median follow-up of 27.29 months, whether or not they underwent surgical resection following RFA.

Conclusion

The results show that RFA for breast cancer smaller than 2 cm is safe and effective. However, prospective studies are needed to validate this conclusion.

SUBMITTER: Xia LY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8126716 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignant tumors. Surgical resection is often only possible in the early stages of HCC and among those with limited cirrhosis. Radiofrequency ablation and Microwave ablation are 2 main types of percutaneous thermal ablation for the treatment of HCC. The efficacy and safety between these 2 therapy methods are still under a debate.ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of Radiofrequency ablation and Microwave ablation in treating HCC.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane databases and Web of Science were systematically searched. We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing the efficacy and safety of Radiofrequency ablation and Microwave ablation in HCC patients. Outcome measures on local tumor progression, complete ablation, disease-free survival, overall survival, or major complications were compared between the 2 groups. The random effect model was used when there was significant heterogeneity between studies, otherwise the fixed effect model was used.ResultsA total of 33 studies, involving a total of 4589 patients were identified, which included studies comprised 7 RCTs, 24 retrospective observational trials, and 2 prospective observational trial. Microwave ablation had a lower local tumor progression than Radiofrequency ablation in cohort studies (OR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.96, P = .02). Complete ablation rate of Microwave ablation was higher than that of Radiofrequency ablation in cohort studies (OR = 1.54, 95% CI 1.05-2.25, P = .03). There was no significant difference in overall survival and disease-free survival between the 2 groups. Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference in the main complications between Microwave ablation and Radiofrequency ablation.ConclusionsMicrowave ablation has higher complete ablation and lower local tumor progression than Radiofrequency ablation in the ablation treatment of HCC nodules. There was no significant difference in overall survival between the 2 therapy methods.