Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation for solid or predominantly solid benign thyroid nodules: a randomized controlled clinical trial
10.3760/cma.j.cn112138-20231024-00248
- VernacularTitle:微波消融与射频消融治疗实性或实性为主良性甲状腺结节的一项随机对照临床试验
- Author:
Ya ZHANG
1
;
Xue HAN
;
Yujie REN
;
Hongping SUN
;
Shaofeng XIE
;
Xiaoqiu CHU
;
Guofang CHEN
;
Chao LIU
;
Shuhang XU
Author Information
1. 南京中医药大学附属中西医结合医院内分泌科，南京 210028
- Keywords:
Thyroid nodule;
Randomized controlled trial;
Microwave ablation;
Radiofrequency ablation;
Solid
- From:
Chinese Journal of Internal Medicine
2024;63(1):74-80
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the short-term efficacy and the safety of microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of benign thyroid nodules (BTNs).Methods:This prospective randomized controlled trial, performed from December 2019 to September 2021, included 36 patients with solid or predominantly solid BTNs who met the eligibility criteria and provided written informed consent at the Nanjing sub-center (Affiliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine). Patients were assigned to either the MWA group or the RFA group (18 patients in each group) at a ratio of 1∶1 using a block randomization design and allocation concealment using sealed envelope randomization. The independent-sample t-test and χ2 test were used to compare the volume reduction rates (VRRs), effective rates (VRRs≥50%), cosmetic scores, and complication rates at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment between the two groups. Results:The clinical characteristics of the two groups of patients were comparable. After ablation, the nodule volume was significantly reduced in both groups. At 1, 3, and 6 months, there was no significant difference in the volume between the two groups (all P>0.05). At 3 months, the RFA group had a larger VRRs than that in the MWA group (62.08%±12.46% vs. 46.90%±23.16%, t=-2.45, P=0.021). However, at 1 and 6 months, no statistical significance was observed (both P>0.05). No significant difference was observed in the effective rates at the last follow-up (14/18 vs. 18/18, P=0.104). However, the RFA group had a lower cosmetic score than that in the MWA group (1.78±0.43 vs. 2.17±0.51, t=-2.47, P=0.019). There was no statistically significant difference in the complication rates between the two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:Both MWA and RFA were effective and safe treatments for BTNs, with no significant differences in short-term efficacy and safety. In addition, the RFA group showed slightly more favorable outcomes than the MWA group in terms of cosmetic improvement.
