Endovascular treatment of common hepatocellular carcinoma: the experience of one center

  • V.A. Kondratiuk Shalimov National Institute of Surgery and Transplantation NAMS of Ukraine, Kyiv https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2506-5009
  • I.A. Mazanovych Shalimov National Institute of Surgery and Transplantation NAMS of Ukraine, Kyiv
Keywords: hepatocellular carcinoma; chemoembolization.


Objective ‒ to determine the place of transarterial chemoembolization of the liver (TACE) in the modern protocol for treating patients with common hepatocellular carcinoma and by optimizing indications and contraindications to improve the results of complex treatment of these patients.
Materials and methods. During the period 2011‒2021 242 TACE procedures were performed on 112 patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma. Conventional lipidol embolization (c-TACE) was performed in 53 patients, procedures with drug eluting beads (DEB-TACE) ‒ in 58. All patients underwent a minimum of 1, a maximum of 5 TACE procedures. The decision to re-TACE was made individually, according the prevalence of the lesion (for bilobar lesions performed at least 2 unilobar TACE) and the tumor’s response to the intervention.
Results. TACE results were evaluated according to mRECIST criteria: complete tumor response (CR) was noted in 3 (2.7 %) cases, partial (PR) ‒ in 68 (60.7 %) cases, process stabilization (SD) ‒ in 29 (25.9 %), progression (PD) ‒ 12 (10.7 %) cases. According by the obtained results, convincing data for the superiority of any of the applied TACE methods were not found. Repeated TACE courses increase the overall effectiveness of the treatment.
Conclusions. The use of TACE in patients with inoperable hepatocellular carcinoma allows with minimal invasiveness to reduce or stabilize tumor growth in 89.3 % of cases. Repeated performance of the procedure allows to increase the treatment efficiency by 21.2 %.


Download data is not yet available.


Llovet JM, Burroughs A, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2003;362(9399):1907-17. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14964-1 PMID: 14667750.

Marelli L, Stigliano R, Triantos C, et al. Transarterial therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma: Which technique is more effective? A systematic review of cohort and randomized studies. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007;30(1):6-25. doi: 10.1007/s00270-006-0062-3 PMID: 17103105.

Galle PR, Forner A, Llovet JM, et al. EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines: Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2018 Jul;69(1):182-236. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.03.019 PMID: 29628281.

Yamada R, Sato M, Kawabata M, Nakatsuka H, Nakamura K, Takashima S. Hepatic artery embolization in 120 patients with unresectable hepatoma. Radiology. 1983;148(2):397-401. doi: 10.1148/radiology.148.2.6306721 PMID: 6306721.

Lo CM, Ngan H, Tso WK, et al. Randomized controlled trial of transarterial lipiodol chemoembolization for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology. 2002;35(5):1164-71. doi: 10.1053/jhep.2002.33156 PMID: 11981766.

Llovet JM, Real MI, Montana X, et al. Arterial embolisation or chemoembolisation versus symptomatic treatment in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;359(9319):1734-9. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08649-X PMID: 12049862.

Lanza E, Donadon M, Poretti D, et al. Transarterial therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Cancer. 2016;6(1):27-33. doi: 10.1159/000449347 PMCID: PMC5159740 PMID: 27995085.

Song JE, Kim DY. Conventional vs drug-eluting beads transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Hepatol. 2017 June 28;9(18):808-14. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v9.i18.808 PMCID: PMC5491403 PMID: 28706579.

How to Cite
Kondratiuk, V., & Mazanovych, I. (2022). Endovascular treatment of common hepatocellular carcinoma: the experience of one center. Ukrainian Interventional Neuroradiology and Surgery, 37(3), 57-61. https://doi.org/10.26683/2786-4855-2021-3(37)-57-61