Efficacy And Safety Of TAC-RFA Versus RFA Alone For Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-analysis Of Randomized-controlled Trials

Objective To evaluate the Effective and Safet of TACE combinedwith RFA (TACE-R FA)versus RFA alone for hepatocellular carcinoma.Methods PubMed, Cochrane library, SpringerLink、CNKI and so orwere Searched for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy ofTACE-RFA versus RFA alone for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.According to the inclusion criteria, six studies were selected. Two authorscited the details about the designs of the trials,identities of the participantsand the outcomes from the studies included independently. The data wereanalyzed by Revman5.1Software.Results Meta-analysis showed thatTACE-RFA significantly improved the survival rates of patients with HCCat1and3years［odds ratio=2.37,95%confidenceinterval(1.50,3.74),P＜0.0002;odds ratio=1.93,95%confidenceinterval(1.40,2.67), P＜0.0001］and recurrence-free Survivals at1-,3-, and4-y ear ［odds ratio=1.72,95%confidenceinterval(1.12,2.63), P＜0.01; o dds ratio=1.84,95%confidence interval(1.24,2.74), P＜0.002;o dds ratio=2.09,95%confidenceinterval(1.35,3.24), P＜0.0009］ compared with RFA alone Therewas no significant difference in terms of major complications between thetwo groups,for example:common complications［relat ive risk=1.12,95%confidence interval (0.96,1.13), P=0.15;relative risk=1.13,95%con-fidence interval(0.62,2.09),P=0.69］ and especial complications ［rel-ative risk=1.54,95%confidence interval(0.77,3.10), P=0.22］.Conclusion TACE combined with RFA More Effective than Radiofre-quency RFA for Treatment hepatocellular carcinoma it dose not elvate rate ofthe side effects.