ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2022
Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Microwave Ablation versus Surgical Resection in Patients with Solitary Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Survival Benefits of Transarterial Chemoembolization Plus Ablation Therapy in Patients With Intermediate or Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Study.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
- Clinical study on ultrasound-guided percutaneous microwave ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Transarterial-Chemoembolization versus Radiofrequency-Ablation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma within Milan Criteria: A Propensity Score-Matching Study.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Article
- [Guidelines for image-guided ablation of primary liver cancer (2023 version)].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The liver resection for solitary large hepatocellular carcinoma (SLHCC) remains controversial due to the high risk of complications and recurrence after resection. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus microwave ablation (MWA) with resection for SLHCC. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a total of 148 patients who were treated with either TACE-MWA (n = 94) or resection (n = 54) for SLHCC (≥5 cm). A matched cohort composed of 86 patients was included after propensity score matching (PSM). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Results: The TACE-MWA group was older with higher ALT and AST (all P < 0.05). After PSM, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS were 100%, 80.3%, and 51.0% in the TACE-MWA group, and 88.3%, 66.7%, and 39.4% in the liver resection group, respectively. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year PFS were 76.7%, 48.8%, and 19.6% in the TACE-MWA group, and 72%, 40.2%, and 22.6% in the liver resection group, respectively. There was no significant difference in OS and PFS between the two groups (all P > 0.05). For SLHCC patients with tumor size ≥7cm, TACE-MWA showed favorable OS than liver resection. The TACE-MWA group exhibited a lower rate of major complications and shorter hospital stay than the resection group. Conclusion: TACE-MWA showed comparable efficacy to liver resection in patients with SLHCC, but better safety and shorter hospital stay. TACE-MWA might provide a longer OS than liver resection for SLHCC patients with tumor size ≥7cm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.