Dataset Information

No-Touch vs. Conventional Radiofrequency Ablation Using Twin Internally Cooled Wet Electrodes for Small Hepatocellular Carcinomas: A Randomized Prospective Comparative Study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

This study aimed to compare the efficacy between no-touch (NT) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and conventional RFA using twin internally cooled wet (TICW) electrodes in the bipolar mode for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC).

Materials and methods

In this single-center, two-arm, parallel-group, prospective randomized controlled study, we performed a 1:1 random allocation of eligible patients with HCCs to receive NT-RFA or conventional RFA between October 2016 and September 2018. The primary endpoint was the cumulative local tumor progression (LTP) rate after RFA. Secondary endpoints included technical conversion rates of NT-RFA, intrahepatic distance recurrence, extrahepatic metastasis, technical parameters, technical efficacy, and rates of complications. Cumulative LTP rates were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Considering conversion cases from NT-RFA to conventional RFA, intention-to-treat and as-treated analyses were performed.

Results

Enrolled patients were randomly assigned to the NT-RFA group (37 patients with 38 HCCs) or the conventional RFA group (36 patients with 38 HCCs). Among the NT-RFA group patients, conversion to conventional RFA occurred in four patients (10.8%, 4/37). According to intention-to-treat analysis, both 1- and 3-year cumulative LTP rates were 5.6%, in the NT-RFA group, and they were 11.8% and 21.3%, respectively, in the conventional RFA group (p = 0.073, log-rank). In the as-treated analysis, LTP rates at 1 year and 3 years were 0% and 0%, respectively, in the NT-RFA group sand 15.6% and 24.5%, respectively, in the conventional RFA group (p = 0.004, log-rank). In as-treated analysis using multivariable Cox regression analysis, RFA type was the only significant predictive factor for LTP (hazard ratio = 0.061 with conventional RFA as the reference, 95% confidence interval = 0.000-0.497; p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in the procedure characteristics between the two groups. No procedure-related deaths or major complications were observed.

Conclusion

NT-RFA using TICW electrodes in bipolar mode demonstrated significantly lower cumulative LTP rates than conventional RFA for small HCCs, which warrants a larger study for further confirmation.

SUBMITTER: Suh YS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8628150 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the efficacy between bipolar radiofrequency ablation (RFA), using twin internally cooled wet (TICW) electrodes, and switching monopolar RFA, using separable clustered (SC) electrodes, in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after locoregional treatment.Materials and methodsIn this single-center, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled study, we performed a 1:1 random allocation on eligible patients with recurrent HCC after locoregional treatment, to receive TICW-RFA or SC-RFA. The primary endpoint was the minimum diameter of the ablation zone per unit ablation time. Secondary endpoints included other technical parameters, complication rate, technical success and technique efficacy, and clinical outcomes.ResultsEnrolled patients were randomly assigned to the TICW-RFA group (n = 40) or SC-RFA group (n = 37). The two groups did not show significant differences in the primary endpoint, the minimum diameter of the ablation zone per unit ablation time was 2.71 ± 0.98 mm/min and 2.61 ± 0.96 mm/min in the TICW-RFA and SC-RFA groups, respectively (p = 0.577). Total RF energy delivery (11.75 ± 9.04 kcal vs. 22.61 ± 12.98 kcal, p < 0.001) and energy delivery per unit time (0.81 ± 0.49 kcal/min vs. 1.45 ± 0.42 kcal/min, p < 0.001) of the TICW-RFA group were less than those of the SC-RFA group. No procedure-related death or major complications occurred. Technical success was achieved in all patients in both groups, and technique efficacy rates were 100% (46/46) in the TICW-RFA group and 95.0% (38/40) in the SC-RFA group (p = 0.213). The 1-year and 2-year cumulative LTP rates were 11.8% and 24.2%, respectively, in the TICW-RFA group, and 8.6% and 18.1%, respectively, in the SC-RFA group (p = 0.661).ConclusionIn this single-center randomized controlled study from a Korean tertiary referral hospital, TICW-RFA demonstrated similar therapeutic efficacy and safety profile for recurrent HCC after locoregional treatment compared with SC-RFA.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03806218).