• 1. Chinese Evidence-Based Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;
  • 2. Department of Medical Administration, 363th Hospital, Chengdu 610041, China;
  • 3. National Center for Safety Evaluation of Drugs(Chengdu), West China Hospital, Chengdu 610041, China;
  • 4. West China Medical School, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;
  • 5. West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China;
LIYou-ping, Email: yzmylab@hotmail.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective To evaluate the methodological quality and impacts on outcomes for systematic reviews (SRs) of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus hepatic resection (HR) for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods We comprehensively searched six databases and five official websites for health technology assessment (HTA), to collect HTAs, SRs, or meta-analyses from inception to Nov. 11th, 2012. The Overview Quality Assessment Questionnaire (OQAQ) was applied for quality assessment of included studies, the tools recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration was applied for quality assessment for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and the modified MINORS score was applied to assess non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs). The odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were integrated using Stata 10.0 software. Results One HTA, 3 SRs and 15 meta-analyses were included in total. The mean OQAQ score was 3.3 with 95%CI 2.6 to 4.1. Only five (26.3%) SRs were assessed as good quality. Seven studies misused statistical models, and 3 of them changed outcome direction after modification. Five studies (5/19) included retrospective controlled studies as RCTs. A total of 39 primary studies referenced by SRs were included, of which, 3 RCTs were levelled grade B, 35 NRCTs were of moderate quality, with an estimated mean MINORS score of 15.0 (totally, scored 18) with 95%CI 14.6 to 15.4, and only 13 studies (37.1%) scored more than 16. Seventeen primary studies (43.6%) did not meet inclusion criteria of the SRs, of which, 9 (23.1%) studies were mixed with other effective interventions in both groups (TACE, PEI, etc.). Four studies included patients with non-primary HCC. Conclusion Currently, the overall quality of HTAs, SRs and meta-analyses about comparing the effects between RFA and HR for early HCC is fairly poor (high heterogeneity exists, and the evidence level is low. Physicians should apply the evidence with caution in clinical practice.

Citation: WANGYing-qiang, LUOQian-qian, LIYou-ping, DENGShao-lin, LIXiang-lian, WEIShi-you. A Systematic Assessment of the Quality of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses in Radiofrequency Ablation versus Hepatic Resection for Small Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2014, 14(5): 561-574. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20140095 Copy

  • Previous Article

    ost-effectiveness of Thrombolysis Treatment of Ischemic Stroke Based on Outcomes of CT Perfusion: A Comparative Economics Study
  • Next Article

    National Essential Medicines System in China: A Status-quo Analysis