The 1-year CR rate after percutaneous treatment of early HCC was significantly better with RFA than with PEI but did not provide a clear survival advantage in cirrhotic patients.

The treatment of unresectable "non-early" (according to the BCLC classification) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients with transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) followed by radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is retrospectively evaluated and possible prognostic factors of this combined therapy are investigated. Forty-six consecutive cirrhotic patients (Child-Pugh class A or B) with solitary or oligonodular HCC underwent RFA after TACE. The treated lesions were 51 overall (size 30-80 mm, mean 48.9). RFA was performed by a multitined expandable electrodes device after one TACE administration. Local efficacy was evaluated with multiphasic computed tomography (CT) performed an average of 2 months after treatment and then during follow-up. Patient survival rate was also evaluated (follow-up time 1-51 months, mean 15 months). Technical success (defined as complete devascularization during the arterial phase) was achieved in 34/51 lesions (66.7%) at the first CT check and in 29/51 (56.9%) during the succeeding follow-up. Among the considered prognostic factors, only lesion diameter (< or > = 50 mm) was statistically significant in the Fisher's exact test in terms of local control (85.2 vs. 45.8% at first CT, p=.0065; 70.4 vs. 41.7% during follow-up, p=.051). There were two major complications (6.5%): one hepatic failure and one death. A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed survival rates of 89.7% at 12 months and 67.1% at 24 months. Combined therapy for non-early HCC shows a relatively high complete local response (especially in lesions less than 5 cm in diameter) and promising mid-term clinical success. Its overall usefulness has yet to be established by a larger series and risk-benefit analysis.

We defined white blood cells and C protein levels as non-diagnostic of the type of acute inflammation but rather as indicators of the severity of the inflammatory process. We also agree with the authors who proposed the incorporation of ultrasonography into routine practice in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis, but only and exclusively to support other diagnostic procedures and preferably within emergency departments. A thorough clinical examination of patients with suspected acute appendicitis is still the best diagnostic procedure available to us.

No abstract