RFA group RFA USA) Kaplan–Meier method and compared with log-rank test N = 47 Exclusion P < 0.05 was significant Age (range): 58 Macroscopic vascular bile (43–77) y duct invasion; patients with Duration of follow-up >2 tumours; tumours >6 cm Male/female: 40/7 1 month, then Objectives 3-monthly during first 2 y, Child’s grade A/B: 6-monthly after 2 y 42/5 To compare RFA and MTA by surgical approach Potretzke et al Single-centre RFA was used on all RFA Inclusion RFA MTA Outcomes () RHCC patients treated before N = 55 All patients who underwent Percutaneous under Percutaneous under Local tumour progression 2011. All patients were USA Recruitment: percutaneous RFA or MTA general anaesthesia general anaesthesia Mean age (range): OS treated with MTA from between 2001 and 2013 for 32 (23–88) y Internally water-cooled High-powered Complications 2011 to 2013 HCC Level III-3 electrode and system with Male/female: 40/15 Statistical analyses Exclusion generator (Cool-tip; continuous in-phase Quality: moderate MTA Kaplan–Meier compared Covidien, Boulder, CO, output to to 3 Patients who underwent N = 99 with log-rank test for survival USA) with single, antennae (Certus 140; TACE in combination with Mean age (range): Cox’s proportional hazard cluster, or multiple NeuWave Medical, Inc, thermal ablation, or who 61 (44–82) y model for risk differences electrodes in switched Madison, WI, USA) underwent prior Male/female: 81/18 Fine and Gray for risk mode (Cool-tip chemotherapy for HCC analyses Switching Controller; Objectives Covidien) Statistics performed with R To compare local treatment 3.1.0 (R Core Team, 2014 R of HCC efficacy and major Foundation for Statistical complications between RFA Computing, Vienna, Austria) and MTA systems Duration of follow-up Every 3 months for 1 y; thereafter Median follow-up: RFA—31 (1–148) months; MTA—24 (1–57) months
RFA group N = 47 Age (range): 58 (43–77) y Male/female: 40/7 Child’s grade A/B: 42/5 RFA Exclusion Macroscopic vascular bile duct invasion; patients with >2 tumours; tumours >6 cm Objectives To compare RFA and MTA by surgical approach USA) Kaplan–Meier method and compared with log-rank test P < 0.05 was significant Duration of follow-up 1 month, then 3-monthly during first 2 y, 6-monthly after 2 y Potretzke et al () USA Single-centre RHCC Recruitment: Level III-3 Quality: moderate RFA N = 55 Mean age (range): 32 (23–88) y Male/female: 40/15 MTA N = 99 Mean age (range): 61 (44–82) y Male/female: 81/18 Inclusion All patients who underwent percutaneous RFA or MTA between 2001 and 2013 for HCC Exclusion Patients who underwent TACE in combination with thermal ablation, or who underwent prior chemotherapy for HCC Objectives To compare local treatment of HCC efficacy and major complications between RFA and MTA systems RFA Percutaneous under general anaesthesia Internally water-cooled electrode and generator (Cool-tip; Covidien, Boulder, CO, USA) with single, cluster, or multiple electrodes in switched mode (Cool-tip Switching Controller; Covidien) MTA Percutaneous under general anaesthesia High-powered system with continuous in-phase output to to 3 antennae (Certus 140; NeuWave Medical, Inc, Madison, WI, USA) Outcomes Local tumour progression OS Complications Statistical analyses Kaplan–Meier compared with log-rank test for survival Cox’s proportional hazard model for risk differences Fine and Gray for risk analyses Statistics performed with R 3.1.0 (R Core Team, 2014 R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) Duration of follow-up Every 3 months for 1 y; thereafter Median follow-up: RFA—31 (1–148) months; MTA—24 (1–57) months RFA was used on all patients treated before 2011. All patients were treated with MTA from 2011 to 2013
1402-%20Final%20Contracted%20Assessment%20Report%20(ACCESSIBLE).docx