Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation as bridge therapy in potentially transplantable patients with single HCC ≤ 3 cm: A propensity score-matched study

Abstract

ObjectivesThe efficacy of microwave ablation (MWA) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as bridge therapy has been gradually confirmed. We aimed to compare the recurrence beyond the Milan criteria (RBM) rates in potentially transplantable patients with HCC receiving MWA or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as bridge therapy. MethodsIn total, 307 potentially transplantable patients with single HCC ≤ 3 cm who initially received MWA (n = 82) or RFA (n = 225) were included. RBM, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between MWA and RFA groups by using propensity score matching (PSM). Competing risks Cox regression was used to identify predictors of RBM. ResultsAfter PSM, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative RBM rates were 6.8%, 18.3%, and 39.3% in the MWA group (n = 75), and 7.4%,18.5%, and 27.7% in the RFA group (n = 137), respectively, with no significant difference (p = 0.386). MWA and RFA were not the independent risk factors of RBM, and patients with higher alpha-fetoprotein, non-antiviral treatment, and higher MELD score were at greater risk of RBM. Neither corresponding RFS rates (66.7%, 39.2% and 21.4% vs. 70.8%, 47% and 34.7%, p = 0.310) nor OS rates (97.3%, 88.0%, and 75.4% vs. 97.8%, 85.1%, and 70.7%, p = 0.384) for 1-, 3- and 5-years were significantly different between the MWA and RFA groups. The MWA group showed more frequent major complications (21.4% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.004) and longer hospital stays (4 days vs. 2 days, p < 0.001) compared with the RFA group. ConclusionMWA showed comparable RBM, RFS, and OS rates to RFA in potentially transplantable patients with single HCC ≤ 3 cm. Compared to RFA, MWA might provide the same effect as bridge therapy.