View : 131 Download: 0

Conventional Versus Small Doxorubicin-eluting Bead Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Treating Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage 0/A Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Title
Conventional Versus Small Doxorubicin-eluting Bead Transcatheter Arterial Chemoembolization for Treating Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage 0/A Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Authors
Kang Y.J.Lee B.C.Kim J.K.Yim N.Y.Kim H.O.Cho S.B.Jeong Y.Y.
Ewha Authors
조수범
Issue Date
2020
Journal Title
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology
ISSN
0174-1551JCR Link
Citation
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 55 - 64
Keywords
Conventional transcatheter arterial chemoembolizationDrug-eluting bead transcatheter arterial chemoembolizationDrug-eluting beadsHepatocellular carcinomaAdverse event
Publisher
Springer
Indexed
SCIE; SCOPUS scopus
Document Type
Article
Abstract
Purpose: Approximately, 60–70% of patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) globally are ineligible for the recommended first-line procedures. This study aimed to compare conventional transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (cTACE) with a treatment, small drug-eluting bead TACE (DEB-TACE), in patients with stage 0/A HCCs. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively investigated 76 patients who underwent first-time cTACE (n = 40) or DEB-TACE using 75–150 µm DC Beads® (n = 36) for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage 0/A HCC < 3 cm at a single tertiary care center between July 2015 and March 2017. Outcome measurements were time to local progression (assessed per modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors), tumor response at one month and intrahepatic distal recurrence, progression-free survival, overall survival, safety, and toxicity. Results: The study included 60 (78%) men and 16 (21%) women; participant mean age was 65.8 years. Objective response rates between the cTACE and DEB-TACE groups were similar (p > 0.05). Complete and partial 1-month tumor response rates were 60.0% and 22.5%, respectively, in the cTACE group and 69.4% and 25.0%, respectively, in the DEB-TACE group. The abdominal pain grade was significantly lower with DEB-TACE than with cTACE (p = 0.001). AST and ALT levels after tumor treatment with DEB-TACE were significantly lower than those after treatment with cTACE (p = 0.018 and 0.006). Time to local progression, intrahepatic distal recurrence, progression-free survival, and overall survival were not significantly between the DEB-TACE group and the cTACE group (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Time to local progression between groups was not significantly different; however, post-embolic syndrome occurred less frequently in the DEB-TACE group. DEB-TACE appears to be a feasible treatment for small HCCs. Level of Evidence: Level 3. © 2019, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE).
DOI
10.1007/s00270-019-02349-9
Appears in Collections:
의료원 > 의료원 > Journal papers
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE