RESUMO
BACKGROUND: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus repeat hepatectomy (RH) for patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (rHCC) after a previous liver resection. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to October 2021 for randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies. Individual participant survival data of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were extracted and reconstructed followed by one-stage and two-stage meta-analysis. Secondary outcomes were major complications and length of hospital stay (LOHS). RESULTS: A total of seven studies (1317 patients) were analysed. In both one-stage and two-stage meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in OS between the RFA and RH cohorts (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.15, 95% CI 0.98-1.36, P = 0.094 and HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.77-1.64, P = 0.474 respectively), while the RFA group had a higher hazard rate of disease recurrence compared to the RH group (HR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13-1.50, P < 0.001 and HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.09-1.57, P = 0.013, respectively). RFA was associated with fewer major complications and shorter LOHS versus RH (Odds Ratio 0.34, 95% CI 0.15-0.76, P = 0.009 and Weighted Mean Difference - 4.78, 95% CI - 6.30 to - 3.26, P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RH may be associated with superior DFS for rHCC, at the expense of higher morbidity rate and longer LOHS. However, OS is comparable between both modalities. As such, these techniques may be utilized as complementary strategies depending on individual patient and disease factors. Large-scale, randomized, prospective studies are required to corroborate these findings.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Ablação por Cateter , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Ablação por Radiofrequência , Ablação por Cateter/métodos , Hepatectomia/métodos , Humanos , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Ablação por Radiofrequência/métodos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The slit-mesh technique for laparoscopic groin hernia repair remains controversial. We present the largest cohort of patients to date that have undergone laparoscopic hernia repair with this technique and aim to evaluate the impact of both techniques on postoperative recurrence and other secondary outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective, single-institution cohort study of patients who underwent a laparoscopic groin hernia repair over a 5.5-year period was performed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with recurrence, chronic pain, complications, length of stay, and operative time. A propensity score analysis also was performed. Time to recurrence was then subsequently plotted on a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: In total, 611 laparoscopic groin hernia repairs (nonslit: n = 353; slit: n = 258) were reviewed. Mean follow-up duration was 6.6 months. On the multivariate analysis, body mass index was inversely correlated with recurrence (odds ratio, 0.792; 95% confidence interval, 0.656-0.956), whereas a slit mesh had lower recurrence (odds ratio, 0.228; 95% confidence interval, 0.064-0.809). In the propensity score-adjusted analysis, slit mesh remained significantly associated with reduced recurrence (adjusted odds ratio, 0.251; 95% confidence interval, 0.070-0.900), with no differences in chronic pain (adjusted odds ratio, 1.297; 95% confidence interval, 0.275-6.128) or postoperative complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.808; 95% confidence interval, 0.429-7.620). Operative time also was reduced in the slit-mesh group (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: The slit-mesh technique was associated with a reduced likelihood of postoperative recurrence and shorter operative time, with no impact on postoperative chronic pain or complications. A lower body mass index was also correlated with increased likelihood of postoperative recurrence.