Efficacy of radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation in the treatment of thoracic cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation are frequently prescribed for thoracic cancer. However, few writers have been able to draw on any systematic research into the differences between the two ablation methods. METHODS: A literature search was carried out using Embase, PUBMED, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and CNKI databases, with additional searches carried out manually using terms associated with thoracic cancer and thermal ablation. Then we used Google Scholar for a complementary search. Data were extracted from studies of patients that underwent radiofrequency ablation or microwave ablation, and the investigator carried out efficacy evaluation and follow up. The data obtained from the literature were summarized and analyzed using Cochrane Revman software Version 5.3 and SPSS 22.0. RESULTS: There were seven comparative studies, but no randomized studies identified for data extraction; 246 patients received radiofrequency ablation therapy and 319 controls received microwave ablation. There was no significant difference in the six‐month, one‐year, two‐year, and three‐year survival rates, and adverse reactions were found in the two treatments. For patients’ long‐term survival rate, the two treatments can achieve a similar survival time. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of thoracic cancer, microwave ablation can achieve the same efficacy as radiofrequency ablation.