HR Versus RFA for HCC in Patients With PHT (HR-HCC/PHT)

Cirrhosis is common among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); in China, for example, it occurs in approximately 80% of HCC patients. Another common comorbidity of HCC is clinically significant portal hypertension (PHT), which occurs in 25-55% of patients with both HCC and cirrhosis. PHT correlates with the severity of cirrhosis, and it can complicate HCC treatment by increasing the risk of perioperative hemorrhage and liver failure.

Hepatic resection (HR) is a widely used radical therapy for HCC. Although HR is often suitable for HCC patients with cirrhosis, it is widely regarded as unsuitable for HCC patients with PHT because of the potential for postoperative hepatic decompensation. In fact, the absence of PHT is the best predictor of excellent HR outcomes. Guidelines of the American and European Associations for the Study of Liver Disease do not recommend HR as an option for HCC patients with PHT. Several studies, however, have reported that HCC patients with and without clinically significant PHT showed similar short- and long-term outcomes after HR. This controversy is important to resolve because more than 25% of cirrhotic patients with HCC also present with PHT.

Actually, official guidelines recommend liver transplatation for patients with HCC and PHT. However, implementation of liver transplantation is restricted by the lack of liver donation and the high cost of the procedure in many countries, especially China. However, as a minimally invasive therapy, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a popular treatment modality for patients with HCC within Milan Criteria. Moreover, randomized controlled trials have validated and proposed its clinical usage.

So here, we plan to address the safety and efficacy of HR comparing with RFA for HCC patients with PHT using a population from Guangxi province of China, where the population shows the highest HCC incidence in the world.