Survival outcomes of radiofrequency ablation compared with surgery in patients with early-stage primary non-small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis
This study compared the overall survival (OS) of patients with early-stage primary non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus surgery. A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and all available Chinese databases to ide...
Saved in:
Published in | Respiratory investigation Vol. 60; no. 3; pp. 337 - 344 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Netherlands
Elsevier B.V
01.05.2022
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | This study compared the overall survival (OS) of patients with early-stage primary non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus surgery.
A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and all available Chinese databases to identify relevant publications from inception to April 2019. This meta-analysis compared hazard ratios (HRs) for OS. A multivariate fixed effects model was used to perform a meta-analysis to compare survival between treatments.
Six retrospective studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Compared with surgery, RFA was associated with a similar long-term OS. The HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 2-, 3- and 5-year OS were 1.74 [0.82, 3.71], 1.15 [0.65, 2.02] and 2.69 [0.41, 17.47], respectively, while those of the pooled data were 1.47 [0.94, 2.32] in patients with early-stage primary NSCLC.
RFA did not differ significantly from surgery in terms of the 5-year OS in patients with early-stage primary NSCLC. Randomized, controlled clinical trials are warranted to compare these two treatments. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2212-5345 2212-5353 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.resinv.2022.01.002 |