ObjectiveTo summarize the research progress of risk factors related to early recurrence and late recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after radical resection.MethodsReviewed and summarized recent literatures on factors related to early and late recurrence of HCC after radical resection.ResultsRadical resection was the most effective treatment for HCC, but the postoperative recurrence rate was high, which seriously affected the treatment effect. Current research divided the recurrence after radical resection of HCC into early recurrence (≤2 years) and late recurrence (>2 years). Early recurrence was considered to be mainly caused by intrahepatic metastasis (IM), which was related to the tumor itself, while late recurrence was mainly caused by multicentric occurrence (MO) and was related to background liver factors. Factors of the tumor itself, including tumor diameter and number, invasion of tumor large vessels and microvessels, anatomical and non-anatomical resection, tumor margin, residual liver ischemia (RLI), intermittent total entry hepatic blood flow interruption method (IPM), the expression level of circulating microRNA in serum and long-chain non-coding RNA, circulating tumor cells, and circulating tumor DNA were related to early recurrence; background liver factors, including liver cirrhosis, high viral load, and liver inflammatory activity, were associated with late recurrence.ConclusionsBoth the tumor factors associated with early recurrence and the background liver factors associated with late recurrence can affect the recurrence after radical resection of HCC.
ObjectiveTo compare clinical effect of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and open repeated hepatectomy (ORH) in treatment of liver cancer with late recurrence (recurrence time >12 months) and single tumor diameter ≤5 cm.MethodsThe patients with advanced intrahepatic recurrence after first operation for liver cancer in this hospital from January 2013 to December 2019 were retrospectively collected, who were treated with ORH (ORH group) or percutaneous RFA (RFA group) and met the inclusion criteria. The overall survival rate and disease-free survival rate of the two groups were compared after 1∶1 matching by propensity score matching (PSM), while the factors affecting survival were stratified.ResultsA total of 244 patients with recurrent liver cancer were collected, including 134 patients in the ORH group, 110 patients in the RFA group. The patients in the two groups were matched with 1∶1 by PSM, 90 patients in each group. The median overall survival time of the ORH group and the RFA group was 54 months and 45 months, respectively. There were no significant differences in the curves of cumulative overall survival and cumulative disease-free survival between the two groups (P=0.221, P=0.199). The incidence of severe complications in the ORH group was higher than that in the RFA group (10.00% versus 2.22%, P=0.029). A further subgroup analysis showed that the overall survival time of the ORH group was longer than that of the RFA group when the diameter of recurrent liver cancer was 3 to 5 cm (P=0.035), which had no significant differences for the patients with AFP (>400 μg/L or ≤400 μg/L), tumors number (single or multiple), and tumor diameter ≤3 cm between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsPercutaneous RFA is effective and safe in treatment of advanced recurrent liver cancer, its overall survival and disease-free survival are similar to ORH treatment. However, when diameter of recurrent tumor is3–5 cm, ORH treatment has a advantage in prolonging survival time of patients.