ArticleCancers2022
Comparison of Surgical Resection and Percutaneous Ultrasonographic Guided Radiofrequency Ablation for Initial Recurrence of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Early Stage following Curative Treatment.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- No-touch versus conventional radiofrequency ablation for treating solitary recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 3 cm: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2026Article
- Treatment strategies for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma: comparative outcomes of radiofrequency ablation vs. laparoscopic liver resection based on tumor location.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- 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.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Article
- Clinical outcome of radiofrequency ablation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma aged 80 years and older.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Efficacy and safety of targeted therapy plus immunotherapy combined with hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (FOLFOX) for unresectable hepatocarcinoma.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- [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
- Integrating Navigation-Assisted Ablation in the Locoregional Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Attempt to Establish Prognostic Predictive System for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using Artificial Intelligence for Assistance with Selection of Treatment Modality.Liver cancer · 2023Article
- Liver Cancer: Improving Standard Diagnosis and Therapy.Cancers · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Aim: The SURF trial showed that surgical resection (SR) and percutaneous ultrasonographic guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) had equal therapeutic effects for small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, consensus regarding which treatment is appropriate for initial recurrent early-stage HCC remains lacking. This study aimed to elucidate therapeutic efficacy differences between SR and RFA for initial recurrent early-stage HCC. Materials/Methods: From 2000 to 2021, 371 patients with recurrent early-stage HCC (≤3 cm, ≤3 nodules) after undergoing initial curative treatment with SR or RFA were enrolled (median age 72 years; males 269; Child−Pugh A:B, n = 328:43; SR:RFA, n = 36:335). Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were retrospectively evaluated. Results: Although the median albumin−bilirubin (ALBI) score was better in the SR than the RFA group (−2.90 vs. −2.50, p < 0.01), there were no significant differences between them in regard to RFS (median 28.1 months, 95% CI 23.4−50.0 vs. 22.1 months, 95% CI 19.3−26.2; p = 0.34), OS (78.9 months, 95% CI 49.3—not applicable vs. 71.2 months 95% CI, 61.8−84.7; p = 0.337), or complications (8.3% vs. 9.3%; p = 1.0). In sub-analysis for RFS and OS according to ALBI grade revealed no significant differences between the SR and RFA groups (ALBI 1/2 = 28.2/17.5 vs. 24.0/23.4 months; p = 0.881/0684 and ALBI 1/2 = 78.9/58.9 vs. 115.3/52.6 months, p = 0.651/0.578, respectively). Conclusion: This retrospective study found no significant differences in regard to RFS or OS between patients in the SR and the RFA groups for initial recurrence of early-stage HCC after undergoing curative treatment. These results showing equal therapeutic efficacy of SR and RFA confirm the findings of the SURF trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.