©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Clin Oncol. May 24, 2025; 16(5): 105881
Published online May 24, 2025. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v16.i5.105881
Published online May 24, 2025. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v16.i5.105881
Table 5 Meta-analysis summary (overall survival)
| Statistic | Value |
| Number of studies reviewed | 23 |
| Number of studies included in meta-analysis | 11 |
| Pooled hazard ratio | 0.5924 |
| 95% confidence interval for hazard ratio | 0.5404-0.6493 |
| Heterogeneity (I²) | 39.98% |
| Cochran’s Q statistic | 21.66 |
| P value for heterogeneity | 0.0608 |
| Model used | Random effects |
| Significance threshold | HR < 1 favors liver resection |
- Citation: Cicerone O, Mantovani S, Oliviero B, Basilico G, Corallo S, Quaretti P, Maestri M. Navigating the evidence for hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: Surgery vs radiofrequency ablation through sentiment and meta-analysis. World J Clin Oncol 2025; 16(5): 105881
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v16/i5/105881.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5306/wjco.v16.i5.105881