Abstract
To retrospectively compare the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) in the treatment of pulmonary tumors, a total of 75 patients with lung tumor who underwent thermal ablation therapy in Guangdong General Hospital into the study from March 2007 to December 2014 were enrolled. Of the patients, 43 received radiofrequency ablation and 32 received microwaves ablation. The response rates, overall survival (OS), and complications rates between the RFA group and MWA group were compared. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between two groups. The overall response rates of in RFA and MWA groups were 79% (34/43) and 69% (22/32), respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference between two groups (P = 0.309). The 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-year overall survival (OS) rates in RFA group and MWA group were 77%, 55%, 42%, 34% and 75%, 44%, 40%, 27%, respectively. No significant differences were found in the OS rates between two groups (P = 0.653). The complication rates were 49% (21/43) in RFA group and 50% (16/32) in MWA group; there was no significant difference between two groups (P = 0.921). No patients died during the perioperative period. Our study shows that no significant differences exist in efficacy and safety between RFA and MWA for the treatment of pulmonary tumors, which indicates that MWA could be a substitute therapy for RFA in terms of effectiveness and safety for treating pulmonary tumors.