Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma by transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: Comparison of planned periodic chemoembolization and chemoembolization based on tumor response

Citation
O. Ernst et al., Treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma by transcatheter arterial chemoembolization: Comparison of planned periodic chemoembolization and chemoembolization based on tumor response, AM J ROENTG, 172(1), 1999, pp. 59-64
Citations number
24
Categorie Soggetti
Radiology ,Nuclear Medicine & Imaging","Medical Research Diagnosis & Treatment
Journal title
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY
ISSN journal
0361803X → ACNP
Volume
172
Issue
1
Year of publication
1999
Pages
59 - 64
Database
ISI
SICI code
0361-803X(199901)172:1<59:TOHCBT>2.0.ZU;2-M
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to assess the efficacy of transcath eter arterial chemoembolization in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinom a using two different infusion schedules. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Chemoembolization with lipiodol-mediated injection o f doxorubicin was performed in 160 patients. In the first group of 80 patie nts, conventional chemoembolization was initially planned to be repeated at least three times at 2-month intervals. In the second group of 80 patients , chemoembolization was used selectively and repeated only when necessary o n the basis of follow-up CT or MR imaging. According to the Okuda classific ation, 72 patients were stage 1, 33 belonging to group 1 (subgroup 1, Okuda I) and 39 belonging to group 2 (subgroup 2, Okuda 1). Eighty-eight patient s were stage 2, 47 belonging to group 1 (subgroup 1, Okuda 2) and 41 belong ing to group 2 (subgroup 2, Okuda 2). RESULTS. Complications of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization occurred in 19 patients from group 1 and six patients from group 2 (p < .001). The mean time between the first and the third courses was significantly differe nt between group 1 (4 months) and group 2 (14 months) (p < .001). The 1-yea r, 2-year, and 3-year survival rates were significantly different between s ubgroup 1, Okuda 1, (58%, 28%, 11%) and subgroup 2, Okuda 1 (89%, 68%, 39%) (p < . 001), and between subgroup 1, Okuda 2 (19%, 0%, 0%), and subgroup 2 , Okuda 2 (48%, 31%, 15%) (p < .001). CONCLUSION. The efficacy and tolerability of chemoembolization increase whe n it is used selectively and repeated only when necessary. Such technical c onsiderations might explain some of the discrepancies of the results of che moembolization in published data.