Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus surgical radiofrequency ablation for malignant liver tumours: the long‐term results

Background Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been used to treat hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver metastases for more than 10 years with promising early outcomes. Preliminary results comparing percutaneous and surgical approaches have shown no difference in short‐term outcomes. In this study, the longer‐term outcomes were presented. Methods Patients with liver malignancies treated by RFA were prospectively studied from 2003 to 2011. Post‐ablation assessment by computed tomography (CT) scan and serum biochemistry was performed at regular intervals. Recurrence rates and long‐term survival were analysed. Results A total of 233 patients with liver malignancies (75.5% HCC and 24.5% liver metastases) were analysed. Three RFA approaches were used (percutaneous 58.4%, laparoscopic 9.4% and open 32.2%). The median follow‐up time was 29 months. Complete ablation was achieved in 83.7%, with no difference between the two approaches. More wound and chest complications were observed in the surgical group. Intra‐hepatic recurrences were observed in 69.5%; extra‐hepatic recurrences were detected in 22.3%, with no difference between the two groups. There was no statistical difference between the two approaches in overall 1‐, 3‐ and 5‐year survival. Conclusion An extended period of follow‐up in patients with liver malignancies showed that RFA is an effective treatment. No difference was demonstrated between the percutaneous and surgical approach, in terms of recurrence and survival.