A Retrospective Observational Study on the Comfort、Safety and Efficacy of Transbrachial TACE for Liver Cancer

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2026.01.012

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To investigate the safety, comfort and preliminary efficacy of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) via transbrachial approach (TBA) in patients with intermediate-advanced liver cancer.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted to collect clinical data from 300 patients with intermediate-advanced liver cancer who underwent TBA-TACE treatment at Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital from January 2023 to January 2025. The study evaluated the success rates of brachial artery puncture and subsequent procedures, complication incidence, patient-reported comfort, short-term efficacy, and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

300 patients underwent a total of 652 TBA-TACE procedures. The success rate of brachial artery puncture was 99.39%, and the procedure success rate was 100%. The overall incidence of complications was 2.15%, and post-procedure surveys indicated high patient satisfaction. The objective response rates (ORRs) at 1 and 3 months post-procedure were 64.7% and 46.8%, respectively, while the disease control rates (DCRs) were 98% and 96.3%, respectively. The median PFS was 8.3 months.

Conclusion

TBA-TACE is associated with high technical success, a low complication rate, and high patient-reported comfort. The procedure demonstrates favorable preliminary efficacy and represents a promising alternative to traditional vascular access routes for the management of liver cancer.

Key words: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), Transbrachial approach (TBA), Procedure success rate, Patient comfort and safety, Preliminary efficacy

Miaomiao Yang, Fei Li, Wenjing Gong, Ying Liu. A Retrospective Observational Study on the Comfort、Safety and Efficacy of Transbrachial TACE for Liver Cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2026, 14(01): 81-88.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhjrfsxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2026.01.012

https://zhjrfsxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2026/V14/I01/81

Figures/Tables 9

患者特征	统计结果
年龄（岁）	61.64±9.58
性别[例(%)]
男	243(81.0%)
女	57(19.0%)
高血压[例(%)]
有	84(28.0%)
无	216(72%)
糖尿病[例(%)]
有	60(20.0%)
无	240(80.0%)
脑血管病[例(%)]
有	31(10.3%)
无	269(89.7%)
肝炎病史[例(%)]
乙肝	219(73.0%)
丙肝	4(1.3%)
丁肝	1(0.3%)
戊肝	1(0.3%)
无	75(25.0%)
肝硬化[例(%)]
有	82(27.3%)
无	218(72.7%)
Child-Pugh分级[例(%)]
A	238(79.3%)
B	62(20.7%)
巴塞罗那肝癌分期（BCLC）[例(%)]
A	77(25.7%)
B	90(30.0%)
C	133(44.3%)
体能状态评分（PS）[例(%)]
0	167(55.7%)
1	130(43.3%)
2	3(1.0%)
肿瘤数目[例(%)]
1	131(43.7%)
2	32(10.7%)
≥3	127(42.3%)
最大肿瘤直径（cm）	6.1±4.5
既往治疗史[例(%)]
TACE治疗史	191(63.6%）
外科手术	147(49.0%)
内科靶免治疗	130(43.3%)
放疗	3(1.0%)

指标	统计结果
TACE手术成功例次[例(%)]	652(100%)
TBA成功例次[例(%)]	648(99.39%)
穿刺时间（s）	10.50±2.14
置管时间（s）	41.71±9.28
左侧入路[例(%)] 右侧入路[例(%)]	627(96.20%) 25(3.80%)
穿刺点转换例次[例(%)]	4(0.61%)
手术时间（min）	40.73±8.23
透视时间（min）	14.37±3.30

并发症	例次（%）
穿刺部位渗血	5(0.77%)
假性动脉瘤	2(0.31%)
正中神经损伤	1(0.15%)
皮下血肿	5(0.77%)
动脉血栓形成	1(0.15%)

变量/手术次数	1次	2次	3次	4次	5次及以上
TACE手术成功[例(%)]	300(100%)	153(100%)	83(100%)	69(100%)	47(100%)
TBA成功[例(%)]	296(98.7%)	153(100%)	83(100%)	69(100%)	47(100%)
手术时间（min， $x ¯$ ±s）	40.73±8.23	40.71±8.37	40.70±8.92	40.69±8.95	40.68±8.92
穿刺时间（s， $x ¯$ ±s）	10.50±2.14	10.38±2.29	10.27±2.28	10.19±2.03	10.08±1.93
手术并发症[例(%)]	7(1.07%)	5(0.76%)	2(0.31%)	0	0
假性动脉瘤[例(%)]	1(0.15%)	1(0.15%)	0	0	0
血管痉挛[例(%)]	0	0	0	0	0
血管狭窄或闭塞[例(%)]	0	0	0	0	0
动脉血栓形成[例(%)]	1(0.15%)	0	0	0	0
穿刺部位渗血[例(%)]	3(0.46%)	2(0.31%)	0	0	0
正中神经损伤[例(%)]	0	1(0.15%)	0	0	0
皮下血肿[例(%)]	2(0.31%)	1(0.15%)	2(0.31%)	0	0

变量/手术次数	1次	2次	3次	4次	5次及以上
TACE手术成功[例(%)]	300(100%)	153(100%)	83(100%)	69(100%)	47(100%)
TBA成功[例(%)]	296(98.7%)	153(100%)	83(100%)	69(100%)	47(100%)
手术时间（min， $x ¯$ ±s）	40.73±8.23	40.71±8.37	40.70±8.92	40.69±8.95	40.68±8.92
穿刺时间（s， $x ¯$ ±s）	10.50±2.14	10.38±2.29	10.27±2.28	10.19±2.03	10.08±1.93
手术并发症[例(%)]	7(1.07%)	5(0.76%)	2(0.31%)	0	0
假性动脉瘤[例(%)]	1(0.15%)	1(0.15%)	0	0	0
血管痉挛[例(%)]	0	0	0	0	0
血管狭窄或闭塞[例(%)]	0	0	0	0	0
动脉血栓形成[例(%)]	1(0.15%)	0	0	0	0
穿刺部位渗血[例(%)]	3(0.46%)	2(0.31%)	0	0	0
正中神经损伤[例(%)]	0	1(0.15%)	0	0	0
皮下血肿[例(%)]	2(0.31%)	1(0.15%)	2(0.31%)	0	0

随访时间	疗效，例（%）				ORR	DCR
随访时间	CR	PR	SD	PD	ORR	DCR
术后1个月	32(10.7%)	162(54.0%)	100(33.3%)	6(2%)	64.7%	98%
术后3个月	34(11.4%)	105(35.4%)	147(49.5%)	11(3.7%)	46.8%	96.3%

References 21

[1]	Kamya S, Jun G, Arsen O, et al. Recent advances in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Clin Mol Hepatol, 2024, 30(1): 1-15.
[2]	Fabio P, Sadahisa O. Patient selection for transarterial chemoembolization in hepatocellular carcinoma: Importance of benefit/risk assessment[J]. Liver Cancer, 2018, 7(1): 104-119.
[3]	Ricardo Y, Stephen B, Beatriz B, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral arterial access in liver cancer embolization: Randomized trial to assess patient satisfaction[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2018, 29(1): 38-43.
[4]	Wan Y, Chen B, Li N, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral access for patients with liver cancer undergoing hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy: Patient experience and procedural complications[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2022, 33(8): 956-963.
[5]	Lam UP, Lopes Lao EP, Lam KC, et al. Trans-brachial artery access for coronary artery procedures is feasible and safe: Data from a single-center in macau[J]. Chin Med J(Engl), 2019, 132(12): 1478-1481.
[6]	Watanabe S, Minami A, Nishioka M, et al. Left brachial approach for transcatheter arterial embolization therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Dig Dis Sci, 1997, 42(1): 47-58.
[7]	Llovet JM, Lencioni R. mRECIST for HCC: Performance and novel refinements[J]. J Hepatol, 2020, 72(2): 288-306.
[8]	You K, Guo T, Sun D, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral approach for tace: A retrospective study[J]. BMC Gastroenterol, 2023, 23(1): 11.
[9]	Roberto I, Maurizio P, Alessandro P, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral access for hepatic chemoembolization: Intrapatient prospective single-center study[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2017, 28(9): 1234-1239.
[10]	Shunichi S, Akira T, Shungo E, et al. Transradial approach for transcatheter arterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Comparison with conventional transfemoral approach[J]. J Clin Gastroenterol, 2003, 37(5): 412-417.
[11]	Chu HH, Kim JW, Shin JH, et al. Update on transradial access for percutaneous transcatheter visceral artery embolization[J]. Korean J of Radiol, 2021, 22(1): 72-85.
[12]	Lorenzo Górriz A, Rodríguez Paz C, Aguilar Tejedor Y, et al. Early exploration of the economic impact of transradial access(TRA) versus transfemoral access(TFA) for neurovascular procedures in spain[J]. J Med Econ, 2023, 26(1): 1445-1454.
[13]	Iezzi R, Posa A, Merlino B, et al. Operator learning curve for transradial liver cancer embolization: Implications for the initiation of a transradial access program[J]. Diagn Interv Radiol, 2019, 25(5): 368-374.
[14]	Ghanem I, Mesbah M, Refaat H. Safety and efficacy of brachial approach for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. Egypt Heart J, 2024, 76(1): 36.
[15]	Appelt K, Takes M, Zech CJ, et al. Complication rates of percutaneous brachial artery puncture: Effect of live ultrasound guidance[J]. CVIR Endovasc, 2021, 4(1): 74.
[16]	Tamanaha Y, Sakakura K, Taniguchi Y, et al. Comparison of postcatheterization pseudoaneurysm between brachial access and femoral access[J]. Int Heart J, 2019, 60(5): 1030-1036.
[17]	Qiu K, Liu X, Jia Z, et al. Comparing transbrachial and transradial as alternatives to transfemoral access for large-bore neuro stenting: Insights from a propensity-matched study[J]. Acad Radiol, 2025, 32(1): 326-333.
[18]	Hung ML, Lee EW, McWilliams JP, et al. A reality check in transradial access: A single-centre comparison of transradial and transfemoral access for abdominal and peripheral intervention[J]. Eur Radiol, 2019, 29(1): 68-74.
[19]	Iezzi R, Pompili M, Posa A, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral access for hepatic chemoembolization: Intrapatient prospective single-center study[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2017, 28(9): 1234-1239.
[20]	Yamada R, Bracewell S, Bassaco B, et al. Transradial versus transfemoral arterial access in liver cancer embolization: Randomized trial to assess patient satisfaction[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2018, 29(1): 38-43.
[21]	Feng G, Feng Y, Yao S, et al. Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization combined with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy versus transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Turk J Gastroenterol, 2024, 35(4): 266-279.

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export