Skip to main content
×
×
Home

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF NAVIGATED RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION FOR HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA IN CHINA

  • Yizhen Lai (a1), Kai Li (a2), Junbo Li (a3) and Sheena Xin Liu (a4)
Abstract

Objectives: Real-time virtual sonography (RVS) is a promising navigation technique for percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) treatment, especially in ablating nodules poorly visualized on conventional ultrasonography (US). However, its cost-effectiveness has not been established. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RVS navigated RFA (RVS-RFA) relative to US guided RFA (US-RFA) in patients with small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in China, from the modified societal perspective.

Methods: A state-transition Markov model was created using TreeAge Pro 2012. The parameters used in the model, including natural history of HCC patients, procedure efficacy and related costs, were obtained from a systematic search of literature through PubMed, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index databases. The simulated cohort was patients with solitary, small HCC (<3 cm in diameter) and Child-Pugh class A or B, whose tumors are poorly visualized in B-mode US but clearly detectable by CT or MRI.

Results: In this cohort of difficult cases, RVS-RFA was a preferred strategy saving 2,467 CNY ($392) throughout the patient's life while gaining additional 1.4 QALYs compared with conventional US guidance. The results were sensitive to the efficacy of US-RFA and RVS-RFA including complete ablation rate and local recurrence rate, the median survival for patients with progressive HCC, the probability of performing RFA for recurrent HCC, and the cost of RVS navigation, disposable needle or hospitalization.

Conclusions: RVS-RFA is a dominant strategy for patients with small HCC unidentifiable in B-mode US, in terms of cost savings and QALYs gained, relative to the conventional US-guided method.

Copyright
References
Hide All
1. Bruix J, Sherman M. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: An update. Hepatology. 2011;3:10201022.
2. Goldberg SN, Grassi CJ, Cardella JF, et al. Image-guided tumor ablation: Standardization of terminology and reporting criteria. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;7 (Suppl):S377S390.
3. Hirooka M, Iuchi H, Kumagi T, et al. Virtual sonographic radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma visualized on CT but not on conventional sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;5 (Suppl):S255S260.
4. Rhim H, Lee MH, Kim YS, et al. Planning sonography to assess the feasibility of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;5:13241330.
5. Kitada T, Murakami T, Kuzushita N, et al. Effectiveness of real-time virtual sonography-guided radiofrequency ablation treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinomas. Hepatol Res. 2008;6:565571.
6. Minami Y, Kudo M, Chung H, et al. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of sonographically unidentifiable liver tumors. Feasibility and usefulness of a novel guiding technique with an integrated system of computed tomography and sonographic images. Oncology. 2007;72:111116.
7. Cho YK, Kim JK, Kim WT, et al. Hepatic resection versus radiofrequency ablation for very early stage hepatocellular carcinoma: A Markov model analysis. Hepatology. 2010;4:12841290.
8. Molinari M, Helton S. Hepatic resection versus radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic individuals not candidates for liver transplantation: A Markov model decision analysis. Am J Surg. 2009;3:396406.
9. Minami Y, Chung H, Kudo M, et al. Radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: Value of virtual CT sonography with magnetic navigation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;6:W335W341.
10. Liu FY, Yu XL, Liang P, et al. Microwave ablation assisted by a real-time virtual navigation system for hepatocellular carcinoma undetectable by conventional ultrasonography. Eur J Radiol. 2012;7:14551459.
11. Nakai M, Sato M, Sahara S, et al. Radiofrequency ablation assisted by real-time virtual sonography and CT for hepatocellular carcinoma undetectable by conventional sonography. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2009;1:62–9.
12. Lee MW, Rhim H, Cha DI, et al. Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: Fusion imaging guidance for management of lesions with poor conspicuity at conventional sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;6:14381444.
13. Livraghi T, Goldberg SN, Lazzaroni S, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma: Radio-frequency ablation of medium and large lesions. Radiology. 2000;3:761768.
14. Zhou Y, Zhao Y, Li B, et al. Meta-analysis of radiofrequency ablation versus hepatic resection for small hepatocellular carcinoma. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010;10:78.
15. Scaife CL, Curley SA. Complication, local recurrence, and survival rates after radiofrequency ablation for hepatic malignancies. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2003;1:243–55.
16. Zhong Y, Deng M, Li M, et al. Abdominal virtual sonography combined with artificial ascite in RFA for HCC of specific sites. Hepatol Int. 2013;7:1–9.
17. Llovet JM, Vilana R, Bru C, et al. Increased risk of tumor seeding after percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for single hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2001;5:11241129.
18. Mulier S, Mulier P, Ni Y, et al. Complications of radiofrequency coagulation of liver tumours. Br J Surg. 2002;10:12061222.
19. de Villa V, Lo CM. Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in Asia. Oncologist. 2007;11:1321–31.
20. McLernon DJ, Dillon J, Donnan PT. Health-state utilities in liver disease: A systematic review. Med Decis Making. 2008;4:582592.
21. Stein K, Rosenberg W, Wong J. Cost effectiveness of combination therapy for hepatitis C: A decision analytic model. Gut. 2002;2:253258.
22. Ruggeri M, Cicchetti A, Gasbarrini A. The cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies against HBV in Italy. Health Policy. 2011;1:7280.
23. Gazelle GS, McMahon PM, Beinfeld MT, et al. Metastatic colorectal carcinoma: Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation versus that of hepatic resection. Radiology. 2004;3:729739.
24. Radiofrequency Ablation when Hepatocellular Carcinoma can not undergo resection. 2002. http://www.cctv.com/lm/560/31/48169.html (accessed November 17, 2012).
25. Peng ZW, Lin XJ, Zhang YJ, et al. Radiofrequency ablation versus hepatic resection for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinomas 2 cm or smaller: A retrospective comparative study. Radiology. 2012;3:10221033.
26. Guan ZQ, Dong ZH, Wang QH, et al. Cost of chronic hepatitis B infection in China. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2004;10 (Suppl 3):S175S178.
27. Chen D, Yao G, Chen W. Economic evaluation of peginterferon Alfa-2a and lamivudine in the treatment of HBeAg negative chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol. 2014;4:19.
28. Chen JQ, Yang GH, Zhu Q, et al. An analysis of related factors of cost of inpatients with hepatic carcinoma receiving operative treatment. Chinese Hospitals. 2003;12:19.
29. Huang J, Yan L, Cheng Z, et al. A randomized trial comparing radiofrequency ablation and surgical resection for HCC conforming to the Milan criteria. Ann Surg. 2010;6:903912.
30. Hung HH, Chiou YY, Hsia CY, et al. Survival rates are comparable after radiofrequency ablation or surgery in patients with small hepatocellular carcinomas. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;1:7986.
31. Vivarelli M, Guglielmi A, Ruzzenente A, et al. Surgical resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma on cirrhotic liver. Ann Surg. 2004;1:102107.
32. Eichler HG, Kong SX, Gerth WC, et al. Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: How are cost-effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge? Value Health. 2004;5:518528.
33. Kawasoe H, Eguchi Y, Mizuta T, et al. Radiofrequency ablation with the real-time virtual sonography system for treating hepatocellular carcinoma difficult to detect by ultrasonography. J Clin Biochem Nutr. 2007;1:6672.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
  • ISSN: 0266-4623
  • EISSN: 1471-6348
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-technology-assessment-in-health-care
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Lai et al. supplementary material
Supplementary tables and figures

 Word (130 KB)
130 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 3
Total number of PDF views: 48 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 421 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 21st January 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.