RÉSUMÉ
Background@#/Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the therapeutic efficacy of ablation and surgery in solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) measuring ≤5 cm with a large HCC cohort database. @*Methods@#The study included consecutive 2,067 patients with solitary HCC who were treated with either ablation (n=1,248) or surgery (n=819). Th e patients were divided into three groups based on the tumor size and compared the outcomes of the two therapies using propensity score matching. @*Results@#No significant difference in recurrence-free survival (RFS) or overall survival (OS) was found between surgery and ablation groups for tumors measuring ≤2 cm or >2 cm but ≤3 cm. For tumors measuring >3 cm but ≤5 cm, RFS was significantly better with surgery than with ablation (3.6 and 2.0 years, respectively, P=0.0297). However, no significant difference in OS was found between surgery and ablation in this group (6.7 and 6.0 years, respectively, P=0.668). @*Conclusion@#The study suggests that surgery and ablation can be equally used as a treatment for solitary HCC no more than 3 cm in diameter. For HCCs measuring 3-5 cm, the OS was not different between therapies; thus, ablation and less invasive therapy can be considered a treatment option; however, special caution should be taken to prevent recurrence.
RÉSUMÉ
Purpose@#Quantitative elastography methods, such as ultrasound two-dimensional shear-wave elastography (2D-SWE) and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), are used to diagnose liver fibrosis. The present study compared liver stiffness determined by 2D-SWE and MRE within individuals and analyzed the degree of agreement between the two techniques. @*Methods@#In total, 888 patients who underwent 2D-SWE and MRE were analyzed. Bland-Altman analysis was performed after both types of measurements were log-transformed to a normal distribution and converted to a common set of units using linear regression analysis for differing scales. The expected limit of agreement (LoA) was defined as the square root of the sum of the squares of 2D-SWE and MRE precision. The percentage difference was expressed as (2D-SWEMRE)/ mean of the two methods×100. @*Results@#A Bland-Altman plot showed that the bias and upper and lower LoAs (ULoA and LLoA) were 0.0002 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.0057 to 0.0061), 0.1747 (95% CI, 0.1646 to 0.1847), and -0.1743 (95% CI, -0.1843 to -0.1642), respectively. In terms of percentage difference, the mean, ULoA, and LLoA were -0.5944%, 19.8950%, and -21.0838%, respectively. The calculated expected LoA was 17.1178% (95% CI, 16.6353% to 17.6002%), and 789 of 888 patients (88.9%) had a percentage difference within the expected LoA. The intraclass correlation coefficient of the two methods indicated an almost perfect correlation (0.8231; 95% CI, 0.8006 to 0.8432; P<0.001). @*Conclusion@#Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated that 2D-SWE and MRE were interchangeable within a clinically acceptable range.