4.1 Article

Complications of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in the treatment of liver tumors

Journal

CIRUGIA ESPANOLA
Volume 96, Issue 9, Pages 560-567

Publisher

ELSEVIER ESPANA SLU
DOI: 10.1016/j.ciresp.2018.06.004

Keywords

Transarterial chemoembolization; Complications; Hepatocellular carcinoma

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is considered a therapeutic option. It is mostly used in hepatocellular carcinoma or liver colorectal, neuroendocrine or melanoma metastases. Although it is considered a safe procedure, TACE presents complications, such as acute cholecystitis, which is the most common. Other procedure-related complications include pulmonary embolism, hepatic abscess, bile duct injury, gastric mucosa injury and, less frequently, acute pancreatitis. The aim of this study is to review the complications following TACE for liver tumors. Methods: We performed a retrospective study including all the TACE procedures performed in a single center during the period between January 2013 and December 2016. Results: Out of the 196 patients with liver tumors who had undergone 322 TACE, 258 (80%) were male and 64 (20%) were female. Mean patient age was 66.5 years. Major complications after chemoembolization included: decompensation with edema/ascites (6 patients), acute cholecystitis (4), acute pancreatitis (3), liver rupture (1), liver abscess (1) and renal failure (1). Postembolization syndrome appeared in 71 (20%) patients. On multivariate analysis, it was observed that concomitant cardiovascular disease (OR: 4.5; 95% CI: 1.2-17; P = .025) is a risk factor for the development of complications. Conclusions: TACE is a safe and effective procedure for liver tumor treatment. The majority of the complications are rare and present a low incidence of mortality. (C) 2018 AEC. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available