Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Combination therapy by transarterial injection of miriplatin-iodized oil suspension with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus microwave ablation (MWA) for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparison of therapeutic efficacy

Authors
  • Miyamoto, Noriyuki1
  • Kanaya, Motoma1
  • Fujii, Takaaki1
  • Kato, Hirotaka1
  • Kudo, Kyohei1
  • Kinota, Naoya2
  • 1 Obihiro Kosei Hospital, 1, W14, S10, Obihiro, Hokkaido, 0800024, Japan , Obihiro (Japan)
  • 2 Hyogo College of Medicine, Mukogawa 1-1, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan , Nishinomiya (Japan)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Japanese Journal of Radiology
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Publication Date
Nov 04, 2020
Volume
39
Issue
4
Pages
376–386
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1007/s11604-020-01064-7
Source
Springer Nature
Keywords
License
Yellow

Abstract

PurposeTo compare the technical efficacy and complications of the transarterial injection of a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or microwave ablation (MWA) in the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs).Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included 123 HCCs in 101 patients treated with the transarterial injection of a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension and RFA (MPT-RFA) (maximum diameter: 1.5 ±\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\pm $$\end{document} 0.5 cm, range: 0.6–3.0 cm) and 68 HCCs in 49 patients treated with the transarterial injection of a miriplatin-iodized oil suspension and MWA (MPT-MWA) (maximum diameter: 1.6 ±\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\pm $$\end{document} 0.7 cm, range: 0.5–3.0 cm). Technical success was defined as the achievement of an ablative margin of at least 5 mm for each tumor. Technical success, complications, and local tumor progression were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe initial technical success rate was significantly higher with MPT-MWA (94.1%) than with MPT-RFA (76.4%; P = 0.003). The number of treatment sessions per nodule was significantly lower with MPT-MWA (1.1) than with MPT-RFA (1.3) (P = 0.004). The major complication rates were similar with MPT-RFA (5.8%) and MPT-MWA (2.7%) (P = 0.391). The one-year local tumor progression rate was similar between MPT-RFA (0%) and MPT-MWA (0%) (P = 0.73).ConclusionMPT-MWA may have improved therapeutic efficiency in the treatment of small HCCs.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times