Skip to main content
Chinese Journal of Hepatology logoLink to Chinese Journal of Hepatology
editorial
. 2026 Jun 20;34(6):534–537. [Article in Chinese] doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20260403-00138

肝脏肿瘤介入超声消融治疗的扩大适应证与临床对策

Clinical strategies and indication expansion of interventional ultrasonography ablative therapy for hepatic tumors

Liang Yuguang 1, Wang Huiyang 1, Zhao Qiyu 1, Jiang Tian'an 1,通信作者:
Editor: 孙 宇航
PMCID: PMC13312290  PMID: 42373435

Abstract

Thermal ablation has become an important treatment option for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma with the development of interventional ultrasound technology. However, in the treatment of medium-to-large-volume tumors, intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and high-risk anatomical sites, it still faces clinical bottlenecks such as high recurrence rates and difficulties with margin control. This article discusses current clinical difficulties and explores indication expansion and coping strategies for various ablation techniques. The "no touch" strategies of radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation have shown an overall survival period that is comparable to that of surgery for medium or multiple tumors that are 3 to 5 cm in size. Microwave ablation and repeated surgical resection that meets the Milan criteria have similar overall and disease-free survival rates in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Non-thermal ablation techniques such as irreversible electroporation offer safe alternatives for refractory lesions adjacent to large blood vessels or bile ducts due to their characteristics of no heat-sink effect and preservation of collagen scaffolds. Image fusion navigation and synergistic "ablation plus immunotherapy" may be key directions for overcoming local control bottlenecks and improving long-term prognosis in the future.

Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma, Radiofrequency ablation, Microwave ablation, Cryoablation, Interventional ultrasound, Immunotherapy


原发性肝癌是我国常见的恶性肿瘤之一。根据中国国家癌症中心最新数据,原发性肝癌死亡率持续上升,已成为我国第二大致命肿瘤[1-3]。随着介入超声与微创治疗学的发展,射频消融(radiofrequency ablation,RFA)和微波消融(microwave ablation,MWA)等热消融技术已日益成熟[4]。大量循证医学证据及国内外指南均明确指出,对于直径≤3 cm的单发肝细胞癌(hepatocellular carcinoma,HCC),热消融可获得与外科手术切除相媲美的长期总生存期,现已成为小肝癌的首选根治性手段之一[5-6]。

然而,随着临床适应证的不断拓宽,当前消融诊疗正面临着亟待解决的主要矛盾:当肿瘤直径扩大至3~5 cm(中等大小或多灶)、病灶位于高危解剖部位(如贴近大血管、胆管或膈顶),或面对生物学行为更具侵袭性的肝内胆管细胞癌(intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,ICC)时,传统消融治疗的局部复发率仍然偏高,其无病生存期与外科手术相比仍存在差距[7]。引发这些技术瓶颈的核心难点在于物理与解剖学的双重限制:一方面,大血管丰富的血流灌注会迅速带走热量,引发显著的“热沉效应”,导致血管周边的肿瘤发生亚致死性热损伤及消融不彻底[8-10];另一方面,为了避免对邻近的门静脉分支、胆管网络或胃肠道造成不可逆的副损伤,操作者往往难以获得可验证的、足够宽的消融边界[11]。

如何克服血流冷却导致的“热沉效应”、如何在不损伤重要脏器及管道支架的前提下实现精准可控的安全边界,是目前亟待突破的临床痛点。基于此,本文立足于临床实际痛点,系统综述近年来多针“无触碰”(No-touch)消融策略,以及不可逆电穿孔(irreversible electroporation,IRE,即纳米刀)等非热消融技术在扩大适应证及应对复杂肝脏肿瘤中的最新研究观点与临床对策[12],以期为肝癌的精准微创治疗提供具有启发性的循证指导。

一、. 突破中大体积肿瘤的局部控制瓶颈

对于直径介于3~5 cm的中等大小HCC肿瘤,常规消融易受能量衰减与热覆盖不足的制约,消融不全及穿刺导致的针道种植成为术后局部复发的主要诱因[13]。为突破这一瓶颈,目前指南正日益推崇RFA的“无触碰”布针策略。该技术通过在肿瘤外周的正常肝实质内多点布放电极,避免了对瘤体的直接物理穿刺,从而从源头上显著降低了肿瘤细胞沿针道微转移的风险[14]。长期的临床队列随访证实,采用多极“无触碰”RFA治疗早期HCC肿瘤,其5年局部无瘤生存率高达94%,在局部原位控制效能上已达到与肝切除术相媲美的高度[7]。

与此同时,MWA则凭借独立于组织电导率的物理机制,展现出良好的优势。与RFA相比,MWA不仅升温更迅猛,更具备卓越的“抗热沉效应”,在处理长径3~5 cm或多中心灶肿瘤时能更高效地产生大范围的凝固性坏死区[15]。这种高效的局部毁损能力在特定高危人群中转化为实质性的生存获益。一项涵盖672例患者的大型多中心倾向性评分匹配研究表明,对于年龄≥60岁且肿瘤长径3~5 cm的HCC患者,MWA治疗后的总体生存率与腹腔镜肝切除术并无显著差异。尤为值得重视的是,在≥73岁的超高龄高危亚组中,MWA因有效规避了外科切除所伴随的术中出血、术后低蛋白血症等围手术期并发症,反而赋予了患者更优的长期总生存期(风险比=0.27,P=0.015)[16]。该证据提示,对于体弱多病、并发症复杂的偏大体积肿瘤的HCC患者,MWA不仅是外科手术的姑息性备选,更是兼顾微创安全与疗效的重要干预手段。

二、. ICC的消融新理念

ICC因其高度侵袭性的生物学行为、早期微血管侵犯倾向及丰富的间质纤维化特征,一直是局部消融治疗领域公认的棘手难题[17-19]。尽管既往部分研究探索了热消融在ICC中的应用,但如何缩小其与外科手术在长期复发控制上的差距,始终是临床争论的核心矛盾[20-21]。近年来,随着大样本、多中心高质量真实世界研究的涌现,人们对ICC消融的认识取得了突破性进展,促使临床诊疗理念发生了转变[22]。

最新的大队列临床研究证实,对于符合米兰标准(即单个肿瘤直径≤5 cm或最多3个肿瘤且最大直径≤3 cm)的多中心ICC患者,MWA与重复肝切除术在5年的总生存期、5年的无病生存期上未展现出显著的差异性[23]。对于消融/切除边缘<5 mm的ICC患者,重复肝切除术的无病生存期显著优于MWA。肿瘤消融边界具有重要意义,表明消融需要在保证安全的前提下尽可能实现充分覆盖。

三、. 应对高危解剖部位:非热消融的战略价值

当肝脏肿瘤毗邻第一/第二肝门、大血管或膈顶等高危解剖结构时,传统热消融技术的临床应用面临重要瓶颈。大血管内丰富的血流会迅速带走热量,引发显著的“热沉效应”,进而导致紧贴血管壁的肿瘤发生亚致死性热损伤及局部的高复发率[24]。同时,热能向四周弥散,极易对脆弱的邻近器官造成不可逆的副损伤,如胆管瘢痕性狭窄或静脉血栓性闭塞。在此背景下,不依赖热力学机制的非热消融技术展现出了不可替代的战略价值。

冷冻消融的屏障保护效应:冷冻消融作为一种基于急速物理降温的干预手段,主要通过细胞内外冰晶的形成及微血管栓塞来诱导组织坏死。其最大的临床优势在于对周边胶原结缔组织(如大血管外膜、膈肌及胆管壁)的直接损伤风险极低[25-27]。此外,冷冻术中形成的“冰球”在超声或CT等影像学监测下具有极佳的对比度,边界清晰可见,操作者可借此实时评估消融范围,从而实现对形态不规则病灶的精准三维适形覆盖[28-29]。近年来的系统综述与荟萃分析结果显示,冷冻消融在治疗肝脏实体肿瘤时的总体安全性与有效性均不亚于RFA,特别是在面对RFA相对禁忌或处于解剖高风险部位的病灶时,可能是理想的替代方案[29]。

IRE的组织支架保留优势:IRE是近年来备受瞩目的新型非热消融技术。它通过在多根穿刺电极间释放千伏级的高压短脉冲电流,击穿靶细胞膜的脂质双分子层,形成永久性纳米级微孔,从而诱发肿瘤细胞的程序性死亡(凋亡)[30]。IRE技术最核心的突破在于其“组织结构保留”特性:它能选择性地杀灭细胞,却能完好地保留由胶原蛋白构成的血管壁、胆管丛及神经纤维等基质支架。最新的多中心随机非劣效性临床试验数据表明,针对热损伤高风险部位的肝脏肿瘤,IRE的技术成功率与传统RFA相当(分别约为96%与99%),且排除了热沉效应的干扰,实现了真正意义上的“贴血管/贴胆管消融”[12]。然而,必须清醒地认识到,IRE的临床成功依赖于术前严密的针道路径规划与术中高精度的平行布极。同时,由于需要放置多根粗针电极,临床实践中仍需高度警惕出血及针道种植转移等严重的并发症风险[31]。值得强调的是,IRE的价值并不止于“替代热消融”,其与免疫治疗的协同潜力正成为更具前景的方向:IRE通过电穿孔介导的细胞死亡可避免热消融造成的蛋白变性与血管炭化,有利于保留肿瘤抗原与局部微血管通道,可促进抗原释放与递呈、改善免疫细胞浸润,从而把局部消融转化为“原位疫苗式”的免疫启动事件。因此,将IRE与免疫检查点抑制剂等系统免疫治疗进行时序化联用,有望在控制局部微小残存病灶的同时,增强远处病灶的系统性免疫清除(潜在“旁观者/远隔效应”),这也应成为未来高质量随机对照试验重点验证的临床转化策略[32]。

四、. 展望

随着装备的微型化与导航技术(如超声造影整合CT/磁共振成像虚拟导航、超声内镜引导)的标准化应用,介入消融的精准度将持续提升。更重要的是,临床关注点正在向“局部消融联合系统治疗”转移。IRE等非热技术能够避免热消融造成的蛋白变性,更好地保留肿瘤抗原,可能引发有效的免疫效应。未来,通过人群精准分层,探索“消融-免疫”的时序化联合,将是把局部微创优势转化为全身长期获益的终极突破口。

利益冲突

所有作者声明不存在利益冲突

作者贡献声明

梁宇光:数据收集、分析、撰稿;王辉阳,赵齐羽,蒋天安:指导、修改及定稿

Funding Statement

浙江省“尖兵领雁+X”研发攻关计划(2024C03092)

The Key Research and Development Project of Zhejiang Province (2024C03092)

Footnotes

梁宇光, 王辉阳, 赵齐羽, 等. 肝脏肿瘤介入超声消融治疗的扩大适应证与临床对策[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志, 2026, 34(6): 534-537. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20260403-00138.

参考文献

  • 1.Liu F, Zhang J, Li K. Postoperative adjuvant management in hepatocellular carcinoma:a review of therapeutic efficacy and prognostic outcomes[J]. World J Hepatol, 2025, 17(9):78-89. DOI: 10.4254/wjh.v17.i9.107631. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Singal AG, Llovet JM, Yarchoan M, et al. AASLD practice guidance on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Hepatology, 2023, 78(6):1922-1965. DOI: 10.1097/hep.0000000000000466. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.中华人民共和国国家卫生健康委员会医政司 .原发性肝癌诊疗指南(2024年版)[J].中华消化外科杂志,2024,23(4):429-478.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115610-20240415-00203. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.中华医学会超声医学分会, 中国研究型医院学会肿瘤介入专业委员会 . 影像引导原发性肝癌消融指南(2023版)[J]. 中华肝脏病杂志, 2024, 32(2):97-112. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20240108-00017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.European Association for the Study of the Liver .EASL clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. J Hepatol, 2025, 82(2):315-374.DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2024.08.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Reig M, Sanduzzi-Zamparelli M, Forner A, et al. BCLC strategy for prognosis prediction and treatment recommendations:the 2026 update[J]. J Hepatol, 2026, 84(3):631-654. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2025.10.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Seror O, N’Kontchou G, Nault JC, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria:no-touch multibipolar radiofrequency ablation for treatment-long-term results[J]. Radiology, 2016, 280(2):611-621.DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016150743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Tan J, Tang T, Zhao W, et al. Initial incomplete thermal ablation is associated with a high risk of tumor progression in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Front Oncol, 2021, 11:760173. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.760173. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Lehmann KS, Poch FG, Rieder C, et al. Minimal vascular flows cause strong heat sink effects in hepatic radiofrequency ablation ex vivo[J]. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 2016, 23(8):508-516. DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Poch FG, Geyer B, Neizert CA, et al. Periportal fields cause stronger cooling effects than veins in hepatic microwave ablation:an in vivo porcine study[J]. Acta Radiol, 2021, 62(3):322-328. DOI: 10.1177/0284185120928929. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Oosterveer TTM, van Erp GCM, Hendriks P, et al. Study protocol prometheus:prospective multicenter study to evaluate the correlation between safety margin and local recurrence after thermal ablation using image co-registration in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol, 2022, 45(5):606-612. DOI: 10.1007/s00270-022-03075-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zhang XB, Zhang X, Ding X, et al. Novel irreversible electroporation ablation (nano-knife) versus radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of solid liver tumors:a comparative, randomized, multicenter clinical study[J]. Front Oncol, 2022, 12:945123. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.945123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Cao S, Lyu T, Fan Z,et al. Long-term outcome of percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for periportal hepatocellular carcinoma:tumor recurrence or progression, survival and clinical significance[J]. Cancer Imaging, 2022, 22(1): 2.DOI: 10.1186/s40644-021-00442-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Tang Y, Chen H, Xing T, et al. No-touch ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma:a narrative review[J]. Int J Hyperthermia, 2025, 42(1):2549810. DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2025.2549810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gu H, Seo Y, Chung DJ,et al. Microwave ablation vs. liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinomas[J]. J Liver Cancer, 2025, 25(1):99-108. DOI: 10.17998/jlc.2025.02.02. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Wang Z, Zhang H, Meng Q, et al. A multicenter case-controlled study on laparoscopic hepatectomy versus microwave ablation as first-line therapy for 3-5 cm hepatocellular carcinoma in patients aged 60 and older[J]. Int J Surg, 2024, 110(3):1356-1366. DOI: 10.1097/js9.0000000000000839. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Sweeney J, Parikh N, El-Haddad G, et al. Ablation of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Semin Intervent Radiol, 2019, 36(4):298-302. DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1696649. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Fu Y, Yang W, Wu W, et al. Radiofrequency ablation in the management of unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2012, 23(5):642-649. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2012.01.081. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Padia SA. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma[J]. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol, 2015, 18(4):227-235. DOI: 10.1053/j.tvir.2015.07.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kim GH, Kim PH, Kim JH, et al. Thermal ablation in the treatment of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur Radiol, 2022, 32(2):1205-1215. DOI: 10.1007/s00330-021-08216-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Giorgio A, Gatti P, Montesarchio L, et al. Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and thermal ablation:long-term results of an italian retrospective multicenter study[J]. J Clin Transl Hepatol, 2019, 7(4):287-292. DOI: 10.14218/jcth.2019.00036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Song M, Li J, Li Y, et al. Efficacy of microwave ablation for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 2025, 15(1):760-769. DOI: 10.21037/qims-24-607. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Pang C, Li J, Dou J, et al. Microwave ablation versus liver resection for primary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma within Milan criteria:a long-term multicenter cohort study[J]. EClinicalMedicine, 2024, 67:102336. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hocquelet A, Balageas P, Frulio N, et al. Aggressive intrasegmental recurrence of periportal hepatocellular carcinoma after radiofrequency ablation:role of ablative technique and heat-sink effect?[J].Radiology, 2015, 276(3):932-933. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2015150661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Song KD. Percutaneous cryoablation for hepatocellular carcinoma[J]. Clin Mol Hepatol, 2016, 22(4):509-515. DOI: 10.3350/cmh.2016.0079. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Bala MM, Riemsma RP, Wolff R, et al. Cryotherapy for liver metastases[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2019, 7(7):Cd009058. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009058.pub3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Silverman SG, Tuncali K, Adams DF, et al. MR imaging-guided percutaneous cryotherapy of liver tumors:initial experience[J]. Radiology, 2000, 217(3):657-664. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.217.3.r00dc40657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kammoun T, Prévot E, Serrand C, et al. Feasibility and safety of single-probe cryoablation with liquid nitrogen:an initial experience in 24 various tumor lesions[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2022, 14(21):5432. DOI: 10.3390/cancers14215432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Elhawary H, Oguro S, Tuncali K, et al. Multimodality non-rigid image registration for planning, targeting and monitoring during CT-guided percutaneous liver tumor cryoablation[J].Acad Radiol, 2010, 17(11):1334-1344. DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2010.06.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Rubinsky B, Onik G, Mikus P. Irreversible electroporation:a new ablation modality-clinical implications[J]. Technol Cancer Res Treat, 2007, 6(1):37-48. DOI: 10.1177/153303460700600106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Silk MT, Wimmer T, Lee KS,et al. Percutaneous ablation of peribiliary tumors with irreversible electroporation[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2014, 25(1):112-118. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.10.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Krishnan A, Mukherjee D. Combining irreversible electroporation and immunotherapy for hepatocellular carcinoma:Reflections and directions for advancement[J]. World J Gastrointest Oncol, 2025, 17(12):113598. DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v17.i12.113598. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Chinese Journal of Hepatology are provided here courtesy of Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University

RESOURCES