The (Eternal) Debate on Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation in BCLC-A Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Abstract

Background/aim: While percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is considered the standard ablative modality for the treatment of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) is being increasingly used in recent years. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare percutaneous MWA versus percutaneous RFA in BCLC-A HCC across randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Patients and methods: Eligible studies included RCTs assessing MWA versus RFA in BCLC-A HCC. Outcomes of interest included: complete ablation (CA) rate, local recurrence (LR) rate, 1-year overall survival (OS) rate, 3-year OS rate and major complications rate.

Results: We retrieved all the relevant RCTs through PubMed/Medline, Cochrane library and EMBASE; five eligible studies involving a total of 794 patients (MWA: 409; RFA: 385) and 1008 nodules of HCC (MWA: 519; RFA: 489) were included in our analysis. No significant differences were found between MWA and RFA regarding CA, LR, 3-year OS and major complications rate. Regarding 1-year OS, a higher rate was observed in the MWA group.

Conclusion: MWA and RFA are effective and safe techniques in early stage, BCLC-A, HCCMWA resulted in better 1-year OS, although this benefit was not confirmed in the 3-year analysis.

Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma; liver cancer; microwave ablation; radiofrequency ablation.