Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 16  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 243-249

A comparison between drug-eluting bead-transarterial chemoembolization and conventional transarterial chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials


1 Department of Lightning Scientific Research Lab, The First Clinical Medical School, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
2 Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
3 Department of Lightning Scientific Research Lab, Clinical School of Imaging, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
4 Department of Cardiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China
5 Department of Interventional Oncology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China

Correspondence Address:
Bo Zhai
Department of Interventional Oncology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai
China
Yihai Liu
Department of Cardiology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing
China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_504_19

Rights and Permissions

Objective: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is the standard treatment for unresectable intermediate hepatocellular carcinoma. Drug-eluting beads (DEB)-TACE is a promising approach expected to improve the efficiency and safety of conventional (c) TACE. However, controversy remains whether DEB-TACE performs better than cTACE. This meta-analysis aimed to compare cTACE and DEB-TACE in terms of overall survival (OS), adverse events, and response rate. Literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science. Complete response (CR), partial response (PR), disease control (DC), stable disease (SD), OS, and major complications were compared between these two modalities. The pooled relative risk and 95% confidence interval were calculated for assessment. Six randomized controlled trials were included for further analysis after a comprehensive search. No significant difference was found in overall response at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, CR, PR, DC (SD), OS and complications between cTACE and DEB-TACE. Conclusion: DEB-TACE had similar therapeutic effects to those of cTACE. Furthermore, major complications in both therapies were similar. The superiority of DEB-TACE over cTACE remains unclear, and further research with high-quality evidence is needed.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1215    
    Printed17    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded34    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal