Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Surgical Resection for Small Unifocal Hepatocellular Carcinomas

We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of hepatic resection and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for small hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) less than 5 cm in diameter. A total of 289 patients were diagnosed with a small HCC (a single tumor no larger than 5 cm). Among these patients, 133 underwent hepatic resection, and 156 received RFA. Demographic data, intraoperative data, post-operative recovery data, and the baseline characteristics of the 2 groups of patients were compared. The incidence of post-operative complications; 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates; and tumor recurrence were determined. No statistically significant differences in the baseline characteristics were noted between the 2 groups. By contrast, operation time (P = 0.003), intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.000), and the length of post-operative hospital stay (P = 0.000) were significantly lower in the RFA group compared with the surgical resection group. The 2 groups displayed similar post-operative complication rates (12% or 16/133 in the liver resection group vs. 8.3% or 13/156 in the RFA group, P = 0.395). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates of the patients in the liver resection group were 88.7%, 78.2%, and 66.2%, respectively, whereas the rates in the RFA group were 90.4%, 76.3%, and 66.0%, respectively (P = 0.722). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year tumor-free survival rates of patients in the resection group were 87.2%, 69.9%, and 58.6%, respectively, whereas the rates in the RFA group were 85.9%, 66.0%, and 54.5%, respectively (P = 0.327). In addition, among HCC patients receiving RFA, patients with tumors no greater than 3 cm in diameter exhibited no significant differences regarding overall survival and tumor-free survival rates compared with patients with tumors 3 to 5 cm in diameter (all P > 0.05). RFA is an effective and safe treatment option for small HCCs and may be a preferred choice for HCC patients with small lesions.