Comparison of efficacy and safety of TACE and DEB-TACE in treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma
10.3760/cma.j.cn113884-20221001-00376
- VernacularTitle:传统TACE与DEB-TACE治疗不可切除肝细胞癌患者的短期疗效和安全性比较
- Author:
Xia LUO
1
;
Shuaiwei LIU
;
Long HAI
;
Xiaoyan LIU
;
Yan MA
;
Xiangchun DING
;
Lina MA
Author Information
1. 宁夏医科大学总医院感染性疾病科，银川 750004
- Keywords:
Carcinoma, hepatocellular;
Embolization, therapeutic;
Safety;
Efficacy
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hepatobiliary Surgery
2023;29(3):165-169
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of conventional transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) with drug-eluting bead transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (DEB-TACE) in treatment of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods:The data of patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent hepatic artery chemoembolization at General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University from July 2019 to April 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Of 282 patients who were enrolled, there were 233 males and 49 females, aged (55.9±10.0) years. The groups were divided into the conventional TACE group ( n=179) and the DEB-TACE group ( n=103) based on the treatments. The efficacy of the two groups was compared according to the modified response evaluation criteria in solid tumors. Postoperative adverse effects and liver function between the two groups were compared. Results:The differences in comparing the preoperative and postoperative liver function indexes between the two groups were not statistically significant. Patients who died and were lost to follow-up at 6 months after surgery were excluded and 240 patients were excluded in the efficacy analysis, with 148 patients in the conventional TACE group and 92 patients in the DEB-TACE group. At 6 months after treatment in the conventional TACE group, there were 64 patients (43.2%) with complete remission, 18 patients (12.2%) with partial remission, 27 patients (18.2%) with stable disease, and 39 patients (26.4%) with disease progression. In the DEB-TACE group, the corresponding figures were 38 patients (41.3%), 17 patients (18.5%), 26 patients (28.3%), and 11 patients (12.0%), respectively. The efficacy of DEB-TACE was better than conventional TACE with statistically significant differences between the 2 groups (χ 2=8.96, P=0.030). The incidence of postoperative embolic syndrome was 53.1% (95/179) in the conventional TACE group, which was significantly higher than the 34.0% (35/103) in the DEB-TACE group (χ 2=7.34, P=0.007). Conclusion:The efficacy and safety of DEB-TACE for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were superior to those of the conventional TACE group.
