Table 3.
Summary of evidence for outcomes of postoperative adjuvant therapies in the included studies
| Intervention vs comparison | Design | Studies | Outcome | Patients (n) | ES (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pa-TACE vs conservation therapy | RCT and retrospective study | 8 | OS | 1646 | HR 0.64 (0.55–0.74). I2 = 4.2% |
| Pa-TACE vs conservation therapy | RCT and retrospective study | 9 | RFS | 1696 | HR 0.70 (0.62–0.78). I2 = 0% |
| Pa-TACE vs radiotherapy | retrospective study (PSM) | 2 | OS | 178 | HR 1.75 (0.92–3.32). I2 = 0% |
| Pa-TACE vs radiotherapy | retrospective study (PSM) | 2 | RFS | 178 | HR 2.29 (1.43–3.65). I2 = 0% |
| Pa-TACE vs re-resection/ radiofrequency ablation ablation | retrospective study (PSM) | 2 | OS | 129 | HR 0.65 (0.09–4.89) p = 0.671, I2 = 89.3% |
| Sorafenib vs conservation therapy | retrospective study | 1 | OS | 49 | HR 0.219 (0.071–0.672) |
| Sorafenib vs conservation therapy | retrospective study | 1 | RFS | 49 | HR 0.308 (0.131–0.724) |
Pa-TACE postoperative adjuvant transarterial chemoembolization, PSM propensity score matching, RCT randomized double-blind controlled clinical trial