Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet

Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparative analysis of treatment modalities for solitary, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of oncologic outcomes
Univ Toronto, Dept Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada.;Univ Toronto, Inst Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Dalla Lana Sch Publ Hlth, Toronto, ON, Canada.;Univ Hlth Network, HPB Surg Oncol, Toronto, ON, Canada..
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Upper Abdominal Surgery. Univ Hlth Network, HPB Surg Oncol, Toronto, ON, Canada; Henry Ford Hosp, Dept Surg, Detroit, MI USA.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1312-4470
Univ Toronto, Dept Surg, Toronto, ON, Canada.;Univ Hlth Network, HPB Surg Oncol, Toronto, ON, Canada..
Univ Hlth Network, HPB Surg Oncol, Toronto, ON, Canada..ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5654-7043
Show others and affiliations
2025 (English)In: Surgery, ISSN 0039-6060, E-ISSN 1532-7361, Vol. 180, article id 108917Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background

Solitary hepatocellular carcinoma measuring ≤3 cm represents approximately 30% of hepatocellular carcinoma cases, yet treatment guidelines lack robust evidence. This study compares oncologic outcomes after ablation, liver resection, and liver transplantation for solitary, small hepatocellular carcinoma.

Methods

We systematically searched databases up to 7 February 2022, for studies including adults with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma ≤3 cm treated by any ablation, liver resection, or liver transplantation. We excluded non-hepatocellular carcinoma cancers, recurrent/metastatic diseases, and alternative therapies. A frequentist network meta-analysis assessed 5-year overall survival and recurrence-free survival using only adjusted effect estimates while accounting for bias risk.

Results

We identified 80 studies (4 randomized controlled trials, 72 retrospectives, and 4 prospective cohorts) with 28,211 patients. In the network meta-analysis for 5-year overall survival (26 studies), liver transplantation was associated with the lowest mortality hazard (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.73, referenced to liver resection), followed by liver resection (reference), whereas ablation had the greatest mortality hazard (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.16–1.49, referenced to liver resection). For 5-year recurrence-free survival (19 studies), liver transplantation had the best outcome (hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.20–0.63, referenced to liver transplantation), followed by liver resection (reference), with ablation showing the least favorable outcome (hazard ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.45–1.93, referenced to liver resection).

Conclusions

This network meta-analysis provides the evidence for comparing treatment modality outcomes for solitary, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma. LT emerges as the superior choice for achieving a better 5-year OS, followed by liver resection, then ablation. When feasible to preserve liver function, liver resection can be prioritized. Ablation with close surveillance should be reserved for individuals unfit for surgery.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2025. Vol. 180, article id 108917
National Category
Surgery Cancer and Oncology Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-554745DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.10.008ISI: 001455707100001PubMedID: 39609218Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85210394104OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-554745DiVA, id: diva2:1952762
Available from: 2025-04-16 Created: 2025-04-16 Last updated: 2025-04-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2225 kB)20 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 2225 kBChecksum SHA-512
ce1a7223d262539f437ada41d62e1cacc8a120a9277d765312f1026f2322f9ca11c5e652bdc67cfc738040805ff5e5160e5bbf619a8ddaea2f85794eb4876c32
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ivanics, TommyLi, ZhihaoClaasen, MarcoChow, JamesEnglesakis, Marina
By organisation
Upper Abdominal Surgery
In the same journal
Surgery
SurgeryCancer and OncologyGastroenterology and Hepatology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 21 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 43 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf