ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2025
Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes Between Repeated Hepatic Resection and Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients with Small Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Initial Curative Resection: A Propensity Score Matched Study.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Study of Post-Recurrence Treatment Strategies for Microvascular Invasion-Positive Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Curative Resection.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
- Outcomes of robotic liver resection and intraoperative radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma in posterior segments VII and VIII.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Repeat hepatic resection (re-resection) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are both standard treatments for small recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after curative resection. This study compares long-term outcomes of these treatments. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with recurrent HCC smaller than 3 cm treated with re-resection or RFA from 2001 to 2019 in a tertiary center. Propensity score matching (PSM) minimized baseline differences. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Subgroup analyses explored outcomes based on recurrence interval, hepatitis infection status, and RFA guidance method (ultrasound [US] versus computed tomography [CT]). Multivariate Cox regression identified predictors of survival and secondary recurrence. Results: After PSM, 106 patients in the re-resection group and 106 in the RFA group were compared. OS rates at 3, 5, and 8 years for re-resection were 97.9%, 85.4%, and 75.8%, compared to 87.8%, 77.9%, and 62.8% for RFA (p = 0.15). DFS rates were 53.3%, 41.8%, and 26.7% for re-resection versus 43.9%, 28.1%, and 24.0% for RFA (p = 0.15). Subgroup analysis indicated re-resection was superior in early recurrence (<24 months) and HBV-related HCC. US-guided and CT-guided RFA showed no significant differences in OS or DFS. HCV infection and multiple tumors were independent predictors of secondary recurrence. Conclusion: Repeat hepatic resection and RFA offer comparable survival for small recurrent HCC. Re-resection is preferred for early recurrence and HBV-related HCC. US- and CT-guided RFA are equally effective alternatives.
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.