ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2024
Comparison of Surgical Resection and Radiofrequency Ablation in Elderly Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma (≤ 3 cm): an updated meta-analysis.Systematic reviews · 2026Pooled it
- Competing risk analysis of surgical resectionTranslational cancer research · 2025Article
- Unlocking the Potential of Radiofrequency Ablation in Treating Hepatocellular Carcinoma Among Elderly Patients: A Literature Review.Acta medica academica · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThe aim of this study was to examine whether the efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and surgical resection (SR) are comparable for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) less than 3 cm in elderly individuals aged 65 years or older.
methodsWe used the National Health Insurance Service claims data in Korea, which was linked with liver cancer stage data from the Central Cancer Registry of the National Cancer Center, as well as death data from the National Statistical Office. Out of the 9213 registrants, we focused on 141 patients who underwent SR and 225 patients who underwent RFA when they were 65 years or older. To ensure comparability, a 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching was conducted.
resultsThe SR group had lower performance status and better liver function compared to the RFA group. Tumor diameter was larger in the SR group than in the RFA group (2.1 cm vs. 1.7 cm), and the proportion of stage II cases was higher (62.4% vs. 33.8%). After PS matching, the mortality rate in the RFA group did not significantly differ from the SR group (HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.86-2.06, P = 0.19). Also, liver related mortality was similar between the SR and RFA group after matching (log rank P = 0.13). However, recurrence free survival was significantly longer in the SR group than RFA group before and after matching (log rank P = 0.03).
conclusionIn patients aged 65 years or older with resectable HCC, RFA demonstrates a therapeutic effect comparable to SR.
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.