Safety and efficacy of microwave versus radiofrequency ablation for large hepatic hemangioma. A multicenter retrospective study with propensity score matching

To compare the safety and efficacy of microwave ablation (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for such hemangiomas (5-9.9 cm in diameter). This multicenter retrospective cohort study investigated the differences in technical success, ablation time, complete ablation, complications, hospital stay, and clinical response between MWA and RFA. A total of 452 patients with hepatic hemangiomas were screened. Propensity score matching was performed. Univariable and multivariate regression analyses were used. Among the 452 patients, 394 met the eligibility criteria and completed the follow-up. After the propensity score matching analysis, 72 pairs of patients were created. No technical failures were found. The RFA group had a longer ablation time (48.63 ± 18.11 min versus [vs.] 37.18 ± 15.86 min, p < 0.001), higher morbidity of hemoglobinuria (77.78% vs. 50.00%, p < 0.001), and longer hospital stay (5.01 ± 1.56 days vs. 4.34 ± 1.42 days, p < 0.05) than the MWA group. The treatment methods (p = 0.032, OR = 0.105, 95% CI = 0.013-0.821), size of the hemangioma (p = 0.021, OR = 5.243, 95% CI = 1.285-21.391), and time of ablation (p = 0.031, OR = 1.145, 95% CI = 1.013-1.294) were significant independent risk factors associated with hemoglobinuria. No recurrence or delayed complications were observed. There were no differences in complete ablation, clinical response, and health-related quality of life between the groups. MWA and RFA appear to be effective treatments for large hepatic hemangiomas. However, MWA had a shorter ablation time than RFA, and MWA was associated with fewer hemolysis-related complications and shorter hospital stays. MWA and RFA appear to be effective treatments for large hepatic hemangiomas. MWA had a shorter ablation time than RFA. MWA was associated with fewer hemolysis-related complications and shorter hospital stays.