[The comparative results of radiofrequency ablation versus surgical resection for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma].

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Although surgical resection remains the gold standard of therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), only selected patients can undergo resection because of the severity of the underlying cirrhosis or due to the diffuse distribution of the tumor. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has recently shown comparable results to surgical resection for the treatment of HCC. We compared the results of RF ablation and surgical resection for the treatment of HCC.

METHODS: From January 2000 to December 2002, one hundred-sixty patients who had undergone surgical resection or RFA were analyzed retrospectively. The patients with a tumor size less than 5 cm in diameter, with less than 3 tumors in number, with tumor having a Child-Pugh class A classification and no evidence of extrahepatic metastasis were enrolled in the study. The recurrence pattern was classified into local and distant recurrence. We compared the recurrence patterns, the survival rates, the recurrence rates and the complications between the two groups.

RESULTS: 1) The local recurrence rate was 9.8% for surgical resection and 18.2% for RFA and the distant recurrence rate were 32.8% and 28.3%, respectively. 2) The 1-, 2- and 3-year overall cumulative survival rates after RFA and surgery were 95.8%, 86.8%, 80.0%, 98.3%, 87.0% and 77.4%, respectively. 3) The incidence of complication was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency ablation shows comparable results to surgical resection for the treatment of HCC. Therefore, RFA should be considered as the treatment of choice those patients who are not candidates for resection. However, intrahepatic recurrence of tumor after RFA was as frequent as that seen after surgical resection. Further investigation is warranted to clarify whether the current RFA technology could offer improved long-term results.