切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华介入放射学电子杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (03) : 259 -267. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2022.03.008

基础研究

肝细胞癌肝大部分切除术前序贯TACE和门静脉栓塞与单独门静脉栓塞的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析
胡婧媛1, 谢勇1, 田欢2, 向华1,(), 彭冉1, 刘宇洲1, 周璐1, 刘剑1, 蔡卓言1   
  1. 1. 410005 湖南长沙,湖南师范大学附属第一医院(湖南省人民医院)介入血管外科
    2. 050000 河北石家庄,河北医科大学第二医院放射科
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-18 出版日期:2022-08-25
  • 通信作者: 向华
  • 基金资助:
    湖南省重点研发计划(2017SK2181); 湖南省科技创新平台与人才计划(2016SK4002)

Comparison of sequential TACE and portal vein embolization with portal vein embolization alone before major hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jingyuan Hu1, Yong Xie1, Huan Tian2, Hua Xiang1,(), Ran Peng1, Yuzhou Liu1, Lu Zhou1, Jian Liu1, Zhuoyan Cai1   

  1. 1. Department of Interventional Radiology and Vascular Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University, Hunan Provincial People's Hospital), Hunan Changsha 410005
    2. Department of Radiology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Hebei Shijiazhuang 050000, China
  • Received:2021-08-18 Published:2022-08-25
  • Corresponding author: Hua Xiang
引用本文:

胡婧媛, 谢勇, 田欢, 向华, 彭冉, 刘宇洲, 周璐, 刘剑, 蔡卓言. 肝细胞癌肝大部分切除术前序贯TACE和门静脉栓塞与单独门静脉栓塞的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2022, 10(03): 259-267.

Jingyuan Hu, Yong Xie, Huan Tian, Hua Xiang, Ran Peng, Yuzhou Liu, Lu Zhou, Jian Liu, Zhuoyan Cai. Comparison of sequential TACE and portal vein embolization with portal vein embolization alone before major hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2022, 10(03): 259-267.

目的

比较序贯经导管动脉化疗栓塞(TACE)和门静脉栓塞(PVE)与单独PVE在肝细胞癌(HCC)患者肝大部分切除术前的有效性和安全性。

方法

对PubMed、Cochrane图书馆进行检索。主要终点包括总生存率(OSR)、无复发生存率(RFSR)、残肝体积百分比(FLR)的增加;次要终点包括肝切除率、术后并发症、术后肝功能衰竭率和术后死亡率。

结果

共纳入了五项回顾性研究。结果显示,TACE + PVE组与PVE组相比,具有较高的1年OSR、3年OSR、5年OSR以及10年OSR。结果还表明,TACE + PVE组与PVE组相比,具有较高的1年RFSR、3年RFSR、5年RFSR以及10年RFSR。此外,TACE + PVE组与PVE组相比,具有更高的FLR体积、更高的肝切除率以及较低的术后并发症。

结论

在肝大部分切除术前,对于HCC患者来说,序贯TACE和PVE似乎是比单独PVE更有效的治疗方法,具有更好的生存率和安全性。

Objective

Compare the efficiency and safety of sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) and portal vein embolization (PVE) versus PVE alone before major hepatectomy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

PubMed, the Cochrane Library were screened. The primary endpoints were overall survival rate (OSR), recurrence-free survival rate (RFSR), the increase in the percentage of FLR volume; secondary endpoints were hepatectomy rate, postoperative complications, hepatic failure rate after surgery, and mortality after surgery.

Results

A total of five retrospective studies were included. The results showed the TACE + PVE group had a higher 1-year OSR, 3-year OSR, 5-year OSR, and 10-year OSR than PVE group. The results also indicated the TACE + PVE group had a higher 1-year RFSR, 3-year RFSR, 5-year RFSR, and 10-year RFSR than PVE group. The results demonstrated the TACE + PVE group had a higher FLR volume, as well as higher hepatectomy rate, and lower postoperative complications than PVE group.

Conclusions

Sequential TACE and PVE seem to be a more effective therapy than PVE alone before major hepatectomy for HCC patients, with better survival and safety.

图1 研究入选流程图
表1 纳入研究的基线特征
第一作者/出版年份/国家 发表杂志 研究类型 组别 年龄(岁) 性别 肝病背景(例) 肿瘤直径(cm) PVE与肝切除术的间隔时间 化疗、栓塞材料 结局 文章质量(分)
乙肝 丙肝 酒精肝 其它
Ogata/2006/法国[10] British Journal of Surgery 回顾性研究(从1998至2004) TACE + PVE:18 64 ± 7 14 4 4 11     7 ± 3 5.3(4~8)周
$
10~15 mL碘化油(Lipiodol Ultrafluid;Guerbet Laboratories,Paris,France)和40~60 mg阿霉素的混合物,然后用明胶海绵颗粒(Gelfoam;Upjohn Laboratories,Kalamazoo,Michigan,USA)栓塞 ①②③⑤⑥⑦⑨⑩⑫⑬ 8
PVE:18 63 ± 9 13 5 6 8     7 ± 2 5.7(4~8)周
$
用氰基丙烯酸酯(Histoacryl;B. Braun,Melsungen,Germany)和碘化油(Lipiodol Ultrafluid)的混合物栓塞门静脉右前、后支
Yoo/2010/韩国[7] Annals of surgical oncology 回顾性研究(从1997至2008) TACE + PVE:71 56.0 ± 9.4 60 11 57 9 3   6.36 ± 5.25 29 d(平均值) 碘化油(Lipiodol;Laboratoire Guerbet,Cedex,France)和顺铂(2 mg/kg)的混合物,然后用直径1 mm的可吸收明胶海绵颗粒(Gelfoam;Upjohn,Kalamazoo,MI)栓塞 ①②③④⑤⑥⑦⑧⑩⑪⑫⑬ 8
PVE:64 58.2 ± 9.2 56 8 52 3 5   6.66 ± 3.75 31 d(平均值) 门静脉栓塞仅使用明胶海绵(n = 69)、液体栓塞材料Embol-78(n = 25)、带有Amplatzer血管塞的明胶海绵(AGA Medical, Golden Valley,MN) (n = 21)或带线圈的明胶海绵(n = 20)
Choi/2015/韩国[11] Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 回顾性研究(从2003至2011) TACE + PVE:27 52.3 ± 8.6 21 6 27       5.1 ± 1.7     ①②③④ 8
PVE:13 53.8 ± 10 13 0 13       4.5 ± 1.3    
Park/2020/韩国[8] Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Diseases International 回顾性研究(从1993至2017) TACE + PVE:109 52.39 ± 9.2 92 17 93 2 1 13 5.39 ± 2.48 39 (31~49)d 碘化油(Lipiodol;Laboratoire Guerbet,Cedex,France)和顺铂(2 mg/kg)的混合物,然后用可吸收的明胶海绵颗粒(Gelfoam;Upjohn,Kalamazoo,Michigan,USA)栓塞 ①②③④⑤⑥⑦⑧⑨⑩⑫ 8
PVE:38 54.71 ± 8.51 34 4 23 4 0 11 5.94 ± 3.23 23 (20~31)d 栓塞材料包括线圈、凝胶、液体试剂(即聚醋酸乙烯酯)和Amplatzer血管塞(AGA Medical,Golden Valley,MN),可单独使用或混合使用,具体取决于其可用性和操作者偏好
Terasawa/2020/法国[9] Surgery 回顾性研究(从2005至2015) TACE + PVE:27 65.0 (23.0~83.0) 24 3 5 7 3   8.1(5.0~20.0) 47.0(10~111)d
$
注射70 mg多柔比星和10 mg碘油的混合物,然后用明胶海绵颗粒栓塞 ①②⑩⑪⑫ 8
PVE alone:28 65.0 (44.0~82.0) 25 3 7 2 5   9.0 (5.0~18.0) 47.5(2~250)d
$
门静脉区域被氰基丙烯酸酯和碘油的混合物缓慢栓塞
图2 TACE + PVE组和PVE组对比:1年OSR(2A)、3年OSR(2B)、5年OSR(2C)和10年OSR(2D)的森林图,OSR表示总生存率。
图3 TACE + PVE组和PVE组对比:1年RFSR(3A)、3年RFSR(3B)、5年RFSR(3C)和10年RFSR(3D)的森林图。RFSR表示无复发生存率。
图4 TACE + PVE组和PVE组的对比:FLR体积百分比增加(4A)、肝切除率(4B)、术后肝衰竭率(4C)、术后死亡率(4D)、术后并发症(4E)的森林图。
图5 敏感性分析5A:1年总生存率;5B:3年总生存率。
表2 生存率发表偏倚
[1]
Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2015, 65: 87-108.
[2]
Bruix J, Reig M, Sherman M. Evidence-based diagnosis, staging, and treatment of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Gastroenterology, 2016, 150: 835-853.
[3]
Zhou J, Sun HC, Wang Z, et al. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of primary liver cancer in China (2017 Edition)[J]. Liver Cancer, 2018, 7: 235-260.
[4]
Grandhi MS, Kim AK, Ronnekleiv-Kelly SM, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: From diagnosis to treatment[J]. Surg Oncol, 2016, 25: 74-85.
[5]
Aoki T, Kubota K. Preoperative portal vein embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: Consensus and controversy[J]. World J Hepatol, 2016, 8: 439-445.
[6]
Aoki T, Imamura H, Hasegawa K, et al. Sequential preoperative arterial and portal venous embolizations in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Arch Surg, 2004, 139: 766-774.
[7]
Yoo H, Kim JH, Ko GY, et al. Sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and portal vein embolization versus portal vein embolization only before major hepatectomy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2011, 18: 1251-1257.
[8]
Park GC, Lee SG, Yoon YI, et al. Sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and portal vein embolization before right hemihepatectomy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int, 2020, 19: 244-251.
[9]
Terasawa M, Allard MA, Golse N, et al. Sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and portal vein embolization versus portal vein embolization alone before major hepatectomy for patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma: an intent-to-treat analysis[J]. Surgery, 2020, 167: 425-431.
[10]
Ogata S, Belghiti J, Farges O, et al. Sequential arterial and portal vein embolizations before right hepatectomy in patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Br J Surg, 2006, 93: 1091-1098.
[11]
Choi JH, Hwang S, Lee YJ, et al. Prognostic effect of preoperative sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and portal vein embolization for right hepatectomy in patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, 2015, 19:59-65.
[12]
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement[J]. BMJ, 2009, 339: b2535.
[13]
Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses[J]. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010, 25: 603-605.
[14]
Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, et al. Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysis[J]. Trials, 2007, 8: 16.
[15]
Egger M, Davey SG, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple[J]. graphical test. BMJ, 1997, 315: 629-634.
[16]
Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias[J]. Biometrics, 1994, 50: 1088-1101.
[17]
Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Lancet, 2018, 391: 1301-1314.
[18]
Shindoh J, Makuuchi M, Matsuyama Y, et al. Complete removal of the tumor-bearing portal territory decreases local tumor recurrence and improves disease-specific survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2016, 64: 594-600.
[19]
Cucchetti A, Qiao GL, Cescon M, et al. Anatomic versus nonanatomic resection in cirrhotic patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Surgery, 2014, 155: 512-521.
[20]
Abulkhir A, Limongelli P, Healey AJ, et al. Preoperative portal vein embolization for major liver resection: a meta-analysis[J]. Ann Surg, 2008, 247: 49-57.
[21]
Shindoh J, D TC, Vauthey JN. Portal vein embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Liver Cancer, 2012, 1: 159-167.
[22]
Lencioni R, de Baere T, Soulen MC, et al. Lipiodol transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of efficacy and safety data[J]. Hepatology, 2016, 64: 106-116.
[23]
Nakamura K, Beppu T, Hayashi H, et al. Recurrence-free survival of a hepatocellular carcinoma patient with tumor thrombosis of the inferior vena cava after treatment with sorafenib and hepatic resection[J]. Int Surg, 2015, 100: 908-914.
[24]
Zhu AX, Ancukiewicz M, Supko JG, et al. Efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and biomarkers of cediranib monotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phaseⅡstudy[J]. Clin Cancer Res, 2013, 19: 1557-1566.
[25]
Veteläinen R, Dinant S, van Vliet A, et al. Portal vein ligation is as effective as sequential portal vein and hepatic artery ligation in inducing contralateral liver hypertrophy in a rat model[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2006, 17: 1181-1188.
[26]
Imamura H, Seyama Y, Makuuchi M, et al. Sequential transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and portal vein embolization for hepatocellular carcinoma: the university of Tokyo experience[J]. Semin Intervent Radiol, 2008, 25: 146-154.
[1] 李淼, 朱连华, 韩鹏, 姜波, 费翔. 高帧频超声造影评价肝细胞癌血管形态与风险因素的研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 911-915.
[2] 丁建民, 秦正义, 张翔, 周燕, 周洪雨, 王彦冬, 经翔. 超声造影与普美显磁共振成像对具有高危因素的≤3 cm肝结节进行LI-RADS分类诊断的前瞻性研究[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(09): 930-938.
[3] 杨薇, 郝霞, 朱冬振, 张劲柏, 田雪飞, 姚斌. 中医药治疗烧烫伤患者临床效果的荟萃分析[J]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2023, 18(05): 419-426.
[4] 董杰, 杨松, 杨浩, 陈翔, 张万里. 乙酰辅酶A羧化酶2基因高甲基化与肝细胞癌临床病理因素和生存期的关系[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 433-437.
[5] 黄威, 刘启, 陈流华, 滕茶香, 区喆建, 刘韩笑, 陈健聪, 张昆松. 新定义的可预测肝癌预后的焦亡相关lncRNA模型[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 357-365.
[6] 王荣昌, 欧奇峰, 黄晋杰, 王彩琴, 汪谦, 黄晓卉. miR-145-5p在肝细胞癌中的表达及其临床意义[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 197-202.
[7] 杨倩, 李翠芳, 张婉秋. 原发性肝癌自发性破裂出血急诊TACE术后的近远期预后及影响因素分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 33-36.
[8] 曹亚娟, 黎兵华, 余德才. 转化治疗联合Laennec入路机器人右半肝切除治疗进展期肝癌[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 16(02): 116-119.
[9] 王秀, 王义国. 乌司奴单抗治疗克罗恩病肛周瘘管的有效性和安全性分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 514-519.
[10] 胡宝茹, 尚乃舰, 高迪. 中晚期肝细胞癌的DCE-MRI及DWI表现与免疫治疗预后的相关性分析[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 399-403.
[11] 吴凤芸, 滕鑫, 刘连娟. 高帧频超声造影与增强磁共振对不同直径原发性高分化肝细胞癌的诊断价值[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 404-408.
[12] 刘中百, 任勇军. 肝细胞癌的介入治疗现状及进展[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(02): 111-115.
[13] 周斌, 刘新献. 术前TACE对提高儿童肝母细胞瘤长期生存率的影响[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2023, 11(04): 314-317.
[14] 葛校永, 李亚华, 李宗明, 周子鹤, 吴昆鹏, 李一帆, 韩新巍, 任克伟. 新型温敏性水凝胶在经导管动脉化疗栓塞中的应用进展[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 268-274.
[15] 梁伟, 王晓彬, 洪笑阳, 蔡明岳, 梁礼聪, 陈烨, 黄培凯, 刘铭宇, 林立腾, 朱康顺. 原位肝癌小鼠微波消融术后复发模型的构建[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 133-139.
阅读次数
全文


摘要