User login
Key clinical point: Among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), an “ideal candidate for ablation” per the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system may not be ideal for microwave ablation (MWA); however, patients with BCLC-0 disease may comprise the optimal population for MWA.
Major finding: Liver resection (LRE) vs MWA led to a significantly longer recurrence-free survival in the overall population (P = .025) and patients with BCLC-A disease (P = .003) but not in those with BCLC-0 disease (P = .270), in addition to similar overall survival (P = .976) and post-procedure-related complication rates (P = 1.00) in BCLC-0 patients.
Study details: This retrospective study included patients with HCC who met the criteria of “ideal candidates for ablation” per the BCLC staging system and propensity score-matched those receiving MWA and LRE (overall population 140 pairs; BCLC-0 disease 35 pairs; BCLC-A disease 99 pairs).
Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Tong Y, Cai R et al. Liver resection versus microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma in ideal candidates for ablation per Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging: A propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2022;56(11-12):1602-1614 (Oct 26). Doi: 10.1111/apt.17263
Key clinical point: Among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), an “ideal candidate for ablation” per the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system may not be ideal for microwave ablation (MWA); however, patients with BCLC-0 disease may comprise the optimal population for MWA.
Major finding: Liver resection (LRE) vs MWA led to a significantly longer recurrence-free survival in the overall population (P = .025) and patients with BCLC-A disease (P = .003) but not in those with BCLC-0 disease (P = .270), in addition to similar overall survival (P = .976) and post-procedure-related complication rates (P = 1.00) in BCLC-0 patients.
Study details: This retrospective study included patients with HCC who met the criteria of “ideal candidates for ablation” per the BCLC staging system and propensity score-matched those receiving MWA and LRE (overall population 140 pairs; BCLC-0 disease 35 pairs; BCLC-A disease 99 pairs).
Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Tong Y, Cai R et al. Liver resection versus microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma in ideal candidates for ablation per Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging: A propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2022;56(11-12):1602-1614 (Oct 26). Doi: 10.1111/apt.17263
Key clinical point: Among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), an “ideal candidate for ablation” per the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system may not be ideal for microwave ablation (MWA); however, patients with BCLC-0 disease may comprise the optimal population for MWA.
Major finding: Liver resection (LRE) vs MWA led to a significantly longer recurrence-free survival in the overall population (P = .025) and patients with BCLC-A disease (P = .003) but not in those with BCLC-0 disease (P = .270), in addition to similar overall survival (P = .976) and post-procedure-related complication rates (P = 1.00) in BCLC-0 patients.
Study details: This retrospective study included patients with HCC who met the criteria of “ideal candidates for ablation” per the BCLC staging system and propensity score-matched those receiving MWA and LRE (overall population 140 pairs; BCLC-0 disease 35 pairs; BCLC-A disease 99 pairs).
Disclosures: This study did not receive any funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Source: Tong Y, Cai R et al. Liver resection versus microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma in ideal candidates for ablation per Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging: A propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2022;56(11-12):1602-1614 (Oct 26). Doi: 10.1111/apt.17263