Microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation for perivascular hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score analysis.

Abstract Background To compare the efficacy and safety of microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as first-line treatments for perivascular HCC. Methods This multicentre study enrolled 170 patients with perivascular HCC who underwent MWA or RFA. The ablation response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and complications between the treatment groups for the total and propensity score-matched (PSM) cohorts were compared. Results The disease control rates for MWA and RFA were similar in total (94% vs. 91%, p = 0.492) and PSM (93% vs. 93%, p = 1.00) cohorts. The PFS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 71%, 55% and 52% in MWA group and 61%, 33% and 28% in RFA group (p = 0.017). The OS rates were comparable between two groups in total (p = 0.249) and PSM cohorts (p = 0.345). In subgroup analyses, the PFS of patients with periportal HCC (45 vs. 36 months, p = 0.048) and a single HCC nodule (51 vs. 42 months, p = 0.014) were significantly better in MWA group than RFA. Major complications were more frequent in the MWA group than in RFA (27% vs. 7%, p  Conclusion Compared with RFA, MWA provides better control of tumour progression especially in periportal HCC or single-nodule perivascular HCC patients.