A clinical comparison of ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave and radiofrequency ablation for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma

Objective To investigate the difference of treatment efficacy between percutaneous microwave ablation and radiofrequency ablation for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods Under the same inclusion criteria, 98 nodules of hepatocellular carcinoma in 49 patients were percuta neously treated with microwave ablation and 72 nodules in 53 patients with radiofrequency ablation un der ultrasound guidance. The local tumor control, complication related to treatment and long-term re suits of the two modalities were compared retrospectively. Results The complete ablation rates were 94.9% (93/98) using microwave ablation versus 93. 1%(67/72) using radiofrequeney ahlation (P= 0.75), and the local recurrent rates were 11.8% (11/93) versus 20.9% (14/67) (P=0.12). The occurring rate of major complications associated with microwave ablation and radiofrequency ablation were 8.2% (4/49) versus 5.7% (3/53) (P=0.71). The distant recurrent rates were 69.4% (34/ 49) in the microwave ablation group versus 75.6% (40/53) in the radiofrequency ablation group (P= 0.49). The disease-free 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates in microwave ablation group were 45.9%, 26.9%, and 26.9%, respectively, and those in radiofrequency ablation group were 37.2%, 20.7% and 15.5%, respectively (P=0.53). The 1-, 2-, 3- and 4-year cumulative survival rates in patients receiving microwave ablation were 81.6%, 61.2%, 50.5% and 36.8%, respectively, and in patients undergoing radiofrequency ablation were 71.7%, 47.2%, 37.6% and 24.2%, respectively (P= 0.12). Conclusions The local tumor control, complications related to treatment, and long-term sur vivals hetween percutaneous microwave ablation and radiofrequency ablation are equivalent, and both modalities are safe and effective for treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.