| Autor: |
Kim, Gyoung Min, Kim, Do Young, Won, Jong Yun, Moon, Sungmo, Kim, Seung Up, Kim, Beom Kyung |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
CardioVascular & Interventional Radiology; Sep2024, Vol. 47 Issue 9, p1210-1221, 12p |
| Abstrakt: |
Purpose: To compare the treatment outcomes of glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and evaluate the prognostic factors that influence the outcomes. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 251 consecutive patients who underwent radioembolization for the treatment of HCC at a single tertiary center. Imaging responses after radioembolization were evaluated using the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) 1.1. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic factors. Results: A total of 195 patients were included in this study (glass microsphere, n = 75; resin microsphere, n = 120). The complete and objective response rates were 16.0% and 50.7% in the glass microsphere group and 17.5% and 58.3% in the resin microsphere group, respectively. Median PFS was 241 days in the glass microsphere group and 268 days in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.871). Median OS was 29 months in the glass microsphere group and 40 months in the resin microsphere group (p = 0.669). The only significant prognostic factor was bilobar tumor distribution, which favored resin microspheres (p = 0.023). Procedure-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the resin microsphere group (glass, 2.7% vs. resin, 5.0%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Glass and resin microspheres for the treatment of HCC did not show a significant difference in survival, though major adverse events occurred more frequently with the use of resin microspheres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink