• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Combined hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation versus TACE in improving survival of patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC

    2016-08-26 08:13:07YiFuHouYongGangWeiJiaYinYangTianFuWenMingQingXuLuNanYanandBoLiChengduChina

    Yi-Fu Hou, Yong-Gang Wei, Jia-Yin Yang, Tian-Fu Wen, Ming-Qing Xu, Lu-Nan Yan and Bo LiChengdu, China

    ?

    Combined hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation versus TACE in improving survival of patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC

    Yi-Fu Hou, Yong-Gang Wei, Jia-Yin Yang, Tian-Fu Wen, Ming-Qing Xu, Lu-Nan Yan and Bo Li
    Chengdu, China

    BACKGROUND: Combined hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) provides an additional treatment for patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are conventionally deemed unresectable. This study aimed to analyze the outcome of this combination therapy by comparing it with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE).

    METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 51 patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC who had received the combination therapy. We compared the survival of these patients with that of 102 patients in the TACE group (control). Prognostic factors associated with worse survival in the combination group were analyzed.

    RESULTS: No differences in tumor status and liver function were observed between the TACE group and combination group. The median survival time for the combination group and TACE group was 38 (6-54) and 17 (3-48) months, respectively (P<0.001). The combination group required longer hospitalization than the TACE group [8 (5-14) days vs 4 (2-9) days,P<0.001]. More than two ablations decreased the survival rate in the combination group.

    CONCLUSIONS: Combined hepatectomy and RFA yielded a better long-term outcome than TACE in patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC. Patients with a limited ablated size (≤2 cm), a limited number of ablations (≤2), and adequate surgical margin should be considered candidates for combination therapy.

    (Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2016;15:378-385)

    hepatocellular carcinoma;

    hepatectomy;

    radiofrequency ablation;

    transarterial chemoembolization;

    Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer system

    Introduction

    Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary hepatoma in the world.[1]In Asia,hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is the major risk factor of HCC.[2]According to recent data, there are 400 million people infected with HBV worldwide.[3]Liver resection and liver transplantation are the curative treatments for early-stage HCC.[4-6]However, the treatment for multifocal HCC is controversial. According to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) system,liver resection is no longer suitable for multifocal HCC exceeding the Milan criteria (stage B), and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is recommended.[3]However, tumor status in stage B HCC varies substantially, and researchers believe that some patients can still benefit from an aggressive surgical approach. Retrospective studies[7-9]have demonstrated that curative resection provides better survival than TACE and recently, a randomized clinical trial[10]showed consistent results that resection improves survival compared with TACE.

    Nevertheless, a considerable number of patients with BCLC stage B HCC do not have the option of hepatectomy.[11, 12]For these patients, the non-curative therapeutic TACE is the only option. To increase curative chances for patients with multifocal HCC who on one hand can potentially benefit from surgery but on the other hand, resection is not feasible, the combination of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and partial hepatectomy (PH) was introduced.[13]These patients presented with a resectable dominant tumor along with some other HCC nodules. RFA is a common locoregional therapy, and ac-cording to previous studies, RFA can achieve complete necrosis of HCC lesions less than 2 cm in diameter.[3]The combination of PH and RFA may possibly eradicate all HCC lesions and preserve more hepatic tissue without injury to the major vessels.[14, 15]

    This study was undertaken to compare the survival of patients treated with combined PH and RFA with that of those treated with conventional TACE in patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC. Furthermore, we analyzed the prognostic factors related to the survival of patients with HCC receiving the combination therapy and attempted to choose the suitable candidates for the treatment.

    Methods

    Patients

    Patients who had been diagnosed with HCC in West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2008 to June 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. We enrolled HCC patients who had received the combination therapy. The inclusion criteria were: (1) adult male or female between the age of 18 and 70 years; (2) unresectable BCLC stage B HCC; (3) preoperative liver function corresponding to Child-Pugh A with normal total bilirubin (TB)levels; (4) no evidence of extrahepatic metastasis on preoperative 3-phase enhanced computed tomography (CT)or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); (5) pathological confirmation of HCC; (6) indocyanine green (ICG) retention rate at 15 minutes ≤15% for major liver resection(≥3 segmentectomy) and ≤20% for minor liver resection(<3 segmentectomy or non-anatomic resection); (7) a non-invasive diagnosis of HCC as per the American Association of the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) criteria[16]in patients with a diagnosis of liver cirrhosis: two rounds of radical imaging showed typical features of HCC (contrast uptake in the arterial phase followed by rapid washout in venous phase) confirming the clinical diagnosis of HCC. Percutaneous liver biopsy was not performed in our center. For some cases of small HCC with atypical imaging features, we followed the patients and reevaluated them three months later according to the guidelines; (8) at least 1 cm of margin was required for hepatectomy. Our exclusion criteria were as follows:(1) recurrent HCC; (2) residual tumor tissue found on the cutting edge; (3) performance status (PS) >0; and (4) other locoregional or systemic treatment carried out simultaneously with hepatectomy and RFA.

    In the TACE group, liver function and tumor status were similar to those in the combination group. Preoperative TB, albumin (ALB), ALT, and AST levels were used to match the liver function of the patients. Tumor status was classified into four subgroups. Group Ia: tumor number ≤3, the dominant tumor >3 cm and ≤5 cm; group Ib:tumor number ≤3, the dominant tumor >5 cm; group IIa: tumor number >3, the dominant tumor ≤5 cm; and group IIb: tumor number >3, the dominant tumor >5 cm. Matching up was performed according to the subgroup of tumor status. For patients in the TACE group, at least 2 sessions of TACE were required. In this study, the definition of unresectable HCC in BCLC stage B was based on collective decision-making. Five liver surgery experts and one experienced radiologist determined the surgical options by evaluating liver function, ICG results, remnant liver volume on preoperative imaging scans, and other accompanying diseases.

    We compared baseline demographic data and data on hospitalization, postoperative complications and survival outcomes between the two groups. The primary endpoint was the overall survival rate (OS); the secondary endpoint was the postoperative complication rate. The study was approved by our institutional review board.

    Surgical combination therapy

    For all patients, open surgery was performed by a single surgical team. Liver resection involved one dominant tumor within two liver segments or one lobe. A Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA) was used to dissect the parenchyma under ultrasound guidance. According to tumor location, discontinuous selective hepatic occlusion was applied to control surgical blood loss. RFA was also performed under ultrasound guidance after hepatic resection. Before ablation, we scanned every inch of the remnant liver to locate and evaluate residual tumors. Every detected lesion was ablated using an internally cooled system manufactured by Valleylab (Boulder, CO, USA). A single-needle electrode with an exposed tip was inserted to the tumor bottom under ultrasound guidance. The process of ablation required at least 2 cycles, each lasting 5 to 10 minutes. Afterward, we rescanned the lesion to find out whether the ablative region had already covered the whole tumor. Therefore, a second or a third ablation would be carried out until a satisfying ablative area was covered. A final ultrasound examination was performed to confirm the absence of residual tumor tissue and complete necrosis after resection and ablation. No specimens were taken during the operation; suspicious nodules detected by ultrasound were all ablated, but only those larger than 1 cm in diameter were recorded as additional tumors. When HCC recurrence occurred, re-resection, RFA, TACE,or sorafenib was recommended to the patients according to the location of recurrence and health conditions.[17]

    TACE

    TACE was carried out under local anesthesia usingthe Seldinger technique, in which a 4F-5F French catheter was inserted to the abdominal aorta through the superficial femoral artery. Subsequently we performed hepatic arterial angiography, introducing the catheter tip into the superior mesenteric and celiac arteries under fluoroscopy guidance. After staining of tumors we identified the vascular anatomy around the tumors, selectively inserted the cathether tip into the tumor pathological arteries and infused with an emulsion of lipiodol of up to 30 mL, 5-fluorouracil 500-1000 mg, and adriamycin of up to 10 mg into the target arteries. Afterwards, a gelfoam fragment was injected to embolize the target arteries. After the procedure, the patients were requested to put pressure on the entry site for half an hour to ensure hemostasis. Imaging evaluation was performed one month after each session according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1).[18]Each session was carried out with an interval of 1-2 months.

    Hospitalization and follow-up

    Total hospital and ICU stay was recorded by the hospital digital health care system. In assessment of postoperative complications, we used the Clavien-Dindo classification to characterize the severity.[19]All patients were followed up at our outpatient clinic once a month in the first year after surgery and once every 1-3 months afterwards. Blood routine tests, liver function tests, serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) tests, and abdominal ultrasonography were carried out at each follow-up. When a suspicious nodule was found on ultrasonography or persistent elevated AFP levels were observed, enhanced CT scan or MRI was performed for confirmation. Once HCC recurrence was diagnosed, radical treatment such as resection and RFA was our first choice for patients with sufficient hepatic reserve. TACE and sorafenib were palliative therapeutic options for HCC. For patients with uncontrollable HCC or a general performance status >2 or Child-Pugh C liver function, best supportive care was given. We followed the same strategy for treating recurrence after the second hepatectomy.

    Statistical analysis

    Baseline comparison between the two groups was analyzed using Student's t test for continuous variables,the Mann-Whitney U test for non-parametric variables,and the Chi-square test for categorical variables. Fisher' s exact test was applied to compare data on postoperative complications. Differences in cumulative OS rates between the two groups were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier survival curves and tested using the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify the prognostic risk factors affecting patient survival in the combination group. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed with SPSS version 21.0 (IBM SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

    Results

    Patient demographics

    Strictly adhering to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,we included in this study 51 patients with BCLC stage B HCC who had received the combination therapy. In the TACE group, 102 HCC patients who had received TACE during the same period were included. According to the match-up results, 19.6% of the patients belonged to group Ia, 39.2% to group Ib and 13.7% to group IIa, and the remaining 27.5% belonged to group IIb in the combination therapy group and TACE group (Table 1).

    Table 1. Baseline characteristics between the combination group and TACE group

    Patient demographics are summarized in Table 1. Incontrast to the TACE group, the combination group was characterized by a comparable age (50.7±11.2 vs 53.4 ± 11.6, P=0.85), male ratio (86.3% vs 91.2%, P=0.35), and body mass index (21.2±2.2 vs 23.1±2.7, P=0.47). The TB,ALB, ALT and AST of the TACE group was not different from that of the combination group (P=0.38, P=0.89,P=0.36 and P=0.91, respectively; Table 1). The HBV DNA positive ratios in the combination group and the TACE group were 27.5% (14/51) and 34.3% (35/102), respectively (P=0.39). Analysis of tumor status in the two groups showed that tumor size and tumor number in the combination group were similar to those in the TACE group (P=0.88 and P=1.00, respectively). With regard to tumor distribution, 51.0% (26/51) of the patients in the combination group and 49.0% (50/102) in the TACE group had bilobar HCC (P=0.82). In the combination group, the median ablation size was 2.0 (1.0-2.5) cm. The number of ablated HCC lesions in the combination group ranged from 1 to 4; 11 patients had one solitary ablated HCC lesion, 19 had 2 ablated HCC lesions, 12 had 3 ablated HCC lesions, and 9 had 4 ablated HCC lesions.

    Postoperative outcomes

    In the combination group, 21 (41.2%) of the patients received major liver resection and 30 (58.8%) received minor liver resection. The median hospital stay was 8 days (range 5-14) in the combination group and 4 days (range 2-9) in the TACE group (P<0.001). The median ICU stay in the combination group and the TACE group was 0 day (range 0-2) and 0 day (range 0-1), respectively (P<0.001; Table 2). There was no hospital-associated mortality in both groups. The combination group had a significant higher postoperative complication rate than did the TACE group (36 vs 27, P<0.001). According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, the combination group exhibited significantly severer results. Fifteen patients in the combination group and 75 in the TACE group showed no obvious complications. Thirty-three patients in the combination group and 25 in the TACE group had grade I complications. Three patients in the combination group and 2 in the TACE group had grade II complications (Table 2).

    Table 2. Comparison of postoperative outcomes between the combination group and TACE group

    Fig. 1. Comparison of overall survival between the combination group and TACE group.

    Survival outcomes

    The median survival was 38 months (range 6-54) in the combination group and 17 months (range 3-48) in the TACE group (P<0.001; Fig. 1). The estimated 1-, 2-,and 3-year OS rates for the combination group and the TACE group were 88.2% vs 76.5% (P=0.84), 66.7% vs 20.6% (P<0.001), and 52.9% vs 9.8% (P<0.001), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, we re-compared the survival rates between the combination group and the TACE group stratified by tumor burden (Fig. 2). The results of the combination group were significantly better than those of the TACE group with regard to group Ia, group Ib, and group IIa; 40 (30-42) vs 15 (11-41) months, 42 (18-54) vs 17 (10-48) months, 30 (13-40) vs 15 (7-33)months (P<0.01, P<0.01, and P=0.01, respectively). In group IIb of the combination group, the outcome was comparable to that of the TACE group: 13 (6-29) vs 10 (3-20) months (P=0.20). In the combination group, the median disease-free survival time was 12 months (range 2-54). A total of 54.9% (28/51) of the patients experienced HCC recurrence within 1 year. The estimated 1-, 2-,and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 45.1%, 19.6%,and 11.8%, respectively. In the combination group, 21 (45.7%) of the patients had recurrence close to the surgical margin; 17 (37.0%) had tumors localized at the RFA sites, and the remaining 8 (17.4%) had tumors at bothsites. With regard to the time of recurrence, patterns were categorized into two types: type A, recurrence within 2 years and type B, recurrence after 2 years. In total,there were 46 patients with HCC recurrence, whereas 5 patients remained recurrence-free by the end of the study. About 10.9% (5/46) of the patients with intrahepatic recurrence belonged to type B. In the TACE group, after two sessions of treatment, no patients achieved complete response, 29.4% (30/102) of the patients had partial response, 36.3% (37/102) had stable disease, and 34.3% (35/102) had progressive disease. In the combination group, there were 32 deaths during follow-up, of which 96.9% (31/32) were cancer-related deaths. One patient died in six months after surgery following an accident. In the TACE group, there were 97 deaths during followup and all of them were cancer-related. No patients were lost to follow-up.

    Univariate analysis revealed that factors significantly associated with low survival in the combination group included a total tumor diameter >10 cm [hazard ratio (HR)=3.49, P=0.001] and a number of ablated tumors >2 (HR=7.65, P<0.001). Factors with a P value <0.05 together with selected clinical significant variables, such as dominant tumor size, ablated tumor size, and AFP levels, were selected for multivariate analysis. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model showed that a number of ablated tumors >2 (HR=5.39, 95% confidence interval, 2.16-13.45, P<0.001) was a significant risk factor for survival (Table 3).

    Table 3. Univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors in the combination group

    Fig. 2. Subgroup comparisons of overall survival between the combination group and TACE group.

    Discussion

    Despite the fact that the BCLC system recommends TACE for multifocal HCC beyond the Milan criteria, a series of retrospective studies have shown that liver resection provides a better survival outcome than conventional TACE.[7-9, 20]A randomized clinical trial showed a 3-year OS rate of 51.5% vs 18.1% for PH and TACE, respectively, in resectable multiple HCC beyond the Milan criteria.[10]The Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver recommended resection as the optimal treatment for resectable BCLC stage B HCC as long as there is adequate functional hepatic reserve.[21]However, there are still a great number of patients who are not candidates for hepatectomy. To increase the number of patients who could benefit from complete surgical intervention, RFA simultaneous with hepatectomy was introduced.[13, 22]This combination therapy was designed to eradicate all macroscopic lesions by resection of the dominant lesion and ablation of the residual nodules. For patients with BCLC stage B HCC who are deemed unresectable using hepatectomy only, the combination therapy provides them with an additional treatment option, augmenting the chances of curative treatment.

    Our study showed for the first time that combined PH with RFA provided better survival than conventional TACE for patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC with Child-Pugh A liver function. A study[13]discussed the efficiency and safety of this combination strategy,showing intriguing the 3- and 5-year OS rates of 83% and 68%, respectively. In our study, the 1-year survival rates in the two groups were comparable. However, there was a sharp decrease in survival rate over the second year in the TACE group. The ultimate 3-year survival rate was almost four times higher in the combination group. This phenomenon showed that palliative intervention could not provide a satisfying long-term outcome in patients with a relatively large tumor burden. In China, HCC patients are usually younger and present with more severe tumor status because of maternal-neonatal transmission of HBV. This radical approach could provide these patients with a longer survival time. Moreover, in our subgroup analyses, we compared the survival results stratified by tumor burden and showed that the combination therapy had a significantly better outcome as compared with TACE, except in group IIb. This might imply that as the tumor burden gets more severe, radical treatment may fail to provide any additional improvement in survival. Therefore, not all cases of stage B HCC should be considered suitable for resection or combination therapy. Despite the longer OS, this combination therapy did not prevent a relatively high recurrence rate. Almost 50% of the patients had developed recurrent disease by the first year after surgery. The estimated disease-free survival rate of patients receiving the combination therapy was much lower than that of patients receiving hepatectomy for solitary tumors.[23, 24]The possibility of micro-intrahepatic metastasis missed by surgery cannot be ruled out and analysis of recurrence patterns supported our concerns. Type A was considered to include intrahepatic metastasis, representing early recurrence, and type B was considered to represent multi-centric occurrence, arising de novo in preneoplastic cirrhotic liver tissue. According to a study by Llovet et al, type B had better survival.[25]Only 10.9% of the patients belonged to type B and the majority of them were still at high risk of recurrence. However, we did not find any obvious pattern of recurrence sites in the combination group. Both surgical margin and RFA sites were considered void of residual tumor tissue by pathological examination and intraoperative ultrasound. Although we expected patients with multifocal HCC to have a poor prognosis, we still found the survival benefit entailed by surgical treatment.

    Due to variability in tumor status in patients with BCLC stage B HCC, our original intention was to provide a chance of curative treatment for at least some of the patients. Therefore, suitable candidates should be carefully chosen for this combination therapy. The Cox proportional regression analysis indicated that a number of ablated tumors >2 was an independent risk factor related to OS. This result was consistent with early findings.[21, 26]Tumor number indicated the degree of intrahepatic spread, limited ablated number implied that the tumor has better biological behavior.[27, 28]As the number of ablated tumors increase, prognosis gets poorer because of intrahepatic metastases. Moreover, damage to the liver parenchyma caused by the ablation procedure became obvious. Besides the number of ablated tumors,the size of the ablated tumor should also be considered when matching the expected effect of RFA. Based on previous observations, RFA provides an outcome similar to that of resection in cases of HCC lesions less than 2 cm in diameter.[3, 13, 14]In our study, the largest nodule ablated was 2.5 cm, with 84.3% (43/51) of the lesions being smaller than 2 cm. Therefore, we still suggest an area corresponding to 2 cm to be the optimal upper size limit of the ablated area. Moreover, as described in the methods section, the dominant lesion should be void of vascular invasion and the ample surgical margin is critical. From our experience, we suggest that hepatectomy is restricted to one lobe with at least 1 cm of margin. This could both ensure preservation of sufficient hepatic reserve and at the same time lead to an optimal surgical result.

    In terms of postoperative complication and hospitalization settings, patients underwent TACE treatment hadshorter hospitalization and fewer, milder complications than those treated with the combination therapy. No lifethreatening events occurred in any of the two groups, indicating that the combination therapy for patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC is safe.

    Our study has some limitations. The retrospective nature and small sample size limit its validity. However as previously mentioned, BCLC stage B HCC patients differ substantially in tumor status. The combination therapy provided a proportion of patients with the option of surgical curative treatment. Further studies are required to confirm our results.

    In conclusion, combined PH with RFA should be considered as a safe and practical option for patients with unresectable BCLC stage B HCC with Child-Pugh A liver function. However, not all of these patients would benefit from this combination therapy. Suitable candidates should have resectable dominant HCC restricted to one lobe, a number of ablations ≤2, and an ablated area measuring ≤2 cm (the West China Criteria). It is reasonable to suggest this combination therapy as a treatment option for a certain group of BCLC stage B HCC patients.

    Contributors: HYF, WYG and LB designed the research, HYF analyzed the data, HYF and LB wrote the paper. WYG, YJY, WTF,XMQ, YLN and LB contributed to the operations. All authors contributed to the design and interpretation of the study and to further drafts. LB is the guarantor.

    Funding: None.

    Ethical approval: The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of West China Hospital.

    Competing interest: No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.

    References

    1 de Lope CR, Tremosini S, Forner A, Reig M, Bruix J. Management of HCC. J Hepatol 2012;56:S75-87.

    2 Hussain SA, Ferry DR, El-Gazzaz G, Mirza DF, James ND, Mc-Master P, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2001;12:161-172.

    3 European Association for Study of Liver; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. EASL-EORTC clinical practice guidelines: management of hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2012;56:908-943.

    4 Jarnagin WR. Management of small hepatocellular carcinoma:a review of transplantation, resection, and ablation. Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17:1226-1233.

    5 Truty MJ, Vauthey JN. Surgical resection of high-risk hepatocellular carcinoma: patient selection, preoperative considerations,and operative technique. Ann Surg Oncol 2010;17:1219-1225.

    6 Mazzaferro V, Regalia E, Doci R, Andreola S, Pulvirenti A, Bozzetti F, et al. Liver transplantation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinomas in patients with cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 1996;334:693-699.

    7 Nagashima J, Okuda K, Tanaka M, Sata M, Aoyagi S. Prognostic benefit in cytoreductive surgery for curatively unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma - comparison to transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. Int J Oncol 1999;15:1117-1123.

    8 Inoue K, Nakamura T, Kinoshita T, Konishi M, Nakagohri T,Oda T, et al. Volume reduction surgery for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2004;130:362-366.

    9 Hsu CY, Hsia CY, Huang YH, Su CW, Lin HC, Pai JT, et al. Comparison of surgical resection and transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma beyond the Milan criteria: a propensity score analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19:842-849.

    10 Yin L, Li H, Li AJ, Lau WY, Pan ZY, Lai EC, et al. Partial hepatectomy vs. transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for resectable multiple hepatocellular carcinoma beyond Milan Criteria: a RCT. J Hepatol 2014;61:82-88.

    11 Ng KK, Vauthey JN, Pawlik TM, Lauwers GY, Regimbeau JM,Belghiti J, et al. Is hepatic resection for large or multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma justified? results from a multi-institutional database. Ann Surg Oncol 2005;12:364-373.

    12 Llovet JM. Updated treatment approach to hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol 2005;40:225-235.

    13 Choi D, Lim HK, Joh JW, Kim SJ, Kim MJ, Rhim H, et al. Combined hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation for multifocal hepatocellular carcinomas: long-term follow-up results and prognostic factors. Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:3510-3518.

    14 Takayama T, Makuuchi M, Hasegawa K. Single HCC smaller than 2 cm: surgery or ablation?: surgeon's perspective. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2010;17:422-424.

    15 Wang JH, Wang CC, Hung CH, Chen CL, Lu SN. Survival comparison between surgical resection and radiofrequency ablation for patients in BCLC very early/early stage hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2012;56:412-418.

    16 Bruix J, Sherman M; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Management of hepatocellular carcinoma: an update. Hepatology 2011;53:1020-1022.

    17 Ishizawa T, Hasegawa K, Aoki T, Takahashi M, Inoue Y, Sano K, et al. Neither multiple tumors nor portal hypertension are surgical contraindications for hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology 2008;134:1908-1916.

    18 Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228-247.

    19 Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205-213.

    20 Lin CT, Hsu KF, Chen TW, Yu JC, Chan DC, Yu CY, et al. Comparing hepatic resection and transarterial chemoembolization for Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage B hepatocellular carcinoma: change for treatment of choice? World J Surg 2010;34:2155-2161.

    21 Omata M, Lesmana LA, Tateishi R, Chen PJ, Lin SM, Yoshida H, et al. Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver consensus recommendations on hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatol Int 2010;4:439-474.

    22 Pawlik TM, Izzo F, Cohen DS, Morris JS, Curley SA. Combined resection and radiofrequency ablation for advanced hepatic malignancies: results in 172 patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:1059-1069.

    23 Chen MF, Hwang TL, Jeng LB, Jan YY, Wang CS, Chou FF. Hepatic resection in 120 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Arch Surg 1989;124:1025-1028.

    24 Chen MF, Tsai HP, Jeng LB, Lee WC, Yeh CN, Yu MC, et al. Prognostic factors after resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in noncirrhotic livers: univariate and multivariate analysis. World J Surg 2003;27:443-447.

    25 Llovet JM, Di Bisceglie AM, Bruix J, Kramer BS, Lencioni R,Zhu AX, et al. Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:698-711.

    26 Cucchetti A, Djulbegovic B, Tsalatsanis A, Vitale A, Hozo I, Piscaglia F, et al. When to perform hepatic resection for intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 2015;61:905-914.

    27 Zhao WC, Fan LF, Yang N, Zhang HB, Chen BD, Yang GS. Preoperative predictors of microvascular invasion in multinodular hepatocellular carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 2013;39:858-864.

    28 Zhong JH, Xiang BD, Gong WF, Ke Y, Mo QG, Ma L, et al. Comparison of long-term survival of patients with BCLC stage B hepatocellular carcinoma after liver resection or transarterial chemoembolization. PLoS One 2013;8:e68193.

    Accepted after revision December 22, 2015

    Author Affiliations: Department of Hepatic Surgery, West China Hospital,Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China (Hou YF, Wei YG, Yang JY,Wen TF, Xu MQ, Yan LN and Li B)

    Bo Li, MD, PhD, Department of Hepatic Surgery,West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China (Tel/ Fax: +86-28-85422867; Email: cdlibo@medmail.com.cn)
    ? 2016, Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. All rights reserved.

    10.1016/S1499-3872(16)60089-9
    Published online April 20, 2016.

    July 28, 2015

    久久亚洲国产成人精品v| 一级爰片在线观看| 国产一级毛片在线| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| kizo精华| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 精品福利永久在线观看| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 国产精品 国内视频| 亚洲成人av在线免费| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放| 亚洲第一区二区三区不卡| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 18在线观看网站| 操美女的视频在线观看| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 国产亚洲最大av| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 无限看片的www在线观看| 丝袜在线中文字幕| 午夜免费观看性视频| 国产精品二区激情视频| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| av福利片在线| 一区二区av电影网| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 午夜免费鲁丝| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 国产精品久久久久成人av| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av | 中文天堂在线官网| 国产精品秋霞免费鲁丝片| 日韩av免费高清视频| 亚洲综合色网址| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 欧美在线黄色| 亚洲少妇的诱惑av| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 色视频在线一区二区三区| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 在线天堂中文资源库| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 成人手机av| 亚洲欧洲日产国产| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 国产精品久久久久久精品古装| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 午夜福利,免费看| 亚洲成色77777| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 一二三四中文在线观看免费高清| 一区二区三区乱码不卡18| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 国产1区2区3区精品| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 嫩草影视91久久| 人妻 亚洲 视频| 免费观看av网站的网址| 亚洲熟女精品中文字幕| av天堂久久9| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 精品国产一区二区三区四区第35| 中文字幕另类日韩欧美亚洲嫩草| 国产成人精品无人区| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 亚洲精品视频女| 婷婷色麻豆天堂久久| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 黑人欧美特级aaaaaa片| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 天天影视国产精品| 亚洲成av片中文字幕在线观看| 中文字幕人妻丝袜一区二区 | 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 99久久综合免费| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 免费黄色在线免费观看| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 在线 av 中文字幕| 免费在线观看黄色视频的| bbb黄色大片| 欧美另类一区| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看 | 亚洲第一av免费看| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 色播在线永久视频| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 老熟女久久久| 亚洲欧美色中文字幕在线| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密 | 国产精品免费视频内射| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 波多野结衣av一区二区av| 免费看不卡的av| 国产欧美亚洲国产| 美女中出高潮动态图| 亚洲国产欧美网| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 热re99久久精品国产66热6| av在线老鸭窝| 免费在线观看完整版高清| 伦理电影大哥的女人| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| 无限看片的www在线观看| 夜夜骑夜夜射夜夜干| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 在线精品无人区一区二区三| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 97在线人人人人妻| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 欧美日韩一区二区视频在线观看视频在线| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 亚洲av男天堂| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 综合色丁香网| 韩国高清视频一区二区三区| 免费看不卡的av| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 久久影院123| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 宅男免费午夜| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| 亚洲av福利一区| 国产亚洲最大av| 国产亚洲一区二区精品| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 丝袜人妻中文字幕| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 在现免费观看毛片| 超碰97精品在线观看| 91成人精品电影| 成年人免费黄色播放视频| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 久久影院123| 狂野欧美激情性bbbbbb| 美女午夜性视频免费| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 中国三级夫妇交换| 免费久久久久久久精品成人欧美视频| netflix在线观看网站| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| www.av在线官网国产| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 久久久久国产一级毛片高清牌| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区 | www.自偷自拍.com| 性高湖久久久久久久久免费观看| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 久久热在线av| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 国产一区二区三区综合在线观看| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 97精品久久久久久久久久精品| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 一级爰片在线观看| 日本黄色日本黄色录像| 成人手机av| 亚洲精品视频女| 一级毛片 在线播放| 黄片播放在线免费| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 亚洲伊人色综图| 国产一卡二卡三卡精品 | 免费不卡黄色视频| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 久久精品国产综合久久久| 久久久久久人人人人人| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲精品视频女| 只有这里有精品99| 赤兔流量卡办理| 国产精品.久久久| 哪个播放器可以免费观看大片| 欧美中文综合在线视频| 又黄又粗又硬又大视频| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 国产黄频视频在线观看| 啦啦啦在线观看免费高清www| 91国产中文字幕| videosex国产| 丝袜美腿诱惑在线| 成人黄色视频免费在线看| 91老司机精品| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 精品亚洲成国产av| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 97在线人人人人妻| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 国产免费现黄频在线看| 美女主播在线视频| 亚洲av电影在线观看一区二区三区| 不卡av一区二区三区| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 欧美av亚洲av综合av国产av | 十八禁人妻一区二区| 精品亚洲成a人片在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 卡戴珊不雅视频在线播放| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 成年美女黄网站色视频大全免费| 免费不卡黄色视频| 国产av国产精品国产| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 国产精品免费大片| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 亚洲av福利一区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 你懂的网址亚洲精品在线观看| 一级片'在线观看视频| 最近的中文字幕免费完整| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 免费观看av网站的网址| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 亚洲av在线观看美女高潮| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 久久久精品94久久精品| 在线亚洲精品国产二区图片欧美| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 一级片'在线观看视频| 五月天丁香电影| 日韩一区二区三区影片| 一级毛片电影观看| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 三上悠亚av全集在线观看| 久久鲁丝午夜福利片| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 久热这里只有精品99| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 我要看黄色一级片免费的| 黄片播放在线免费| www日本在线高清视频| 亚洲第一av免费看| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 尾随美女入室| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 精品少妇久久久久久888优播| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 国产视频首页在线观看| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91 | 日韩成人av中文字幕在线观看| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区 | 看非洲黑人一级黄片| 国产99久久九九免费精品| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区 | 亚洲精品一二三| 国产精品一国产av| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| 亚洲av欧美aⅴ国产| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 伊人亚洲综合成人网| 亚洲成人手机| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一出视频| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 国产爽快片一区二区三区| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 捣出白浆h1v1| 成人国语在线视频| 婷婷成人精品国产| 天天添夜夜摸| 午夜免费鲁丝| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 操出白浆在线播放| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 精品国产一区二区久久| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 午夜免费观看性视频| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 亚洲一级一片aⅴ在线观看| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| av卡一久久| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 成人毛片60女人毛片免费| av天堂久久9| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| 一级毛片黄色毛片免费观看视频| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 日本欧美视频一区| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 精品卡一卡二卡四卡免费| 999久久久国产精品视频| 国产成人精品久久久久久| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 成年av动漫网址| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 操美女的视频在线观看| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看 | 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密 | 制服丝袜香蕉在线| 日韩av免费高清视频| 激情视频va一区二区三区| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 香蕉国产在线看| 色播在线永久视频| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久| 91老司机精品| 国产又爽黄色视频| 国产精品一国产av| 超碰成人久久| 国产一区二区激情短视频 | 国产97色在线日韩免费| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 秋霞伦理黄片| 一区二区av电影网| 国产 精品1| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 国产极品粉嫩免费观看在线| 国产精品免费视频内射| 叶爱在线成人免费视频播放| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 亚洲av福利一区| 国产野战对白在线观看| 69精品国产乱码久久久| 国产精品免费视频内射| 99国产综合亚洲精品| 久久人人爽av亚洲精品天堂| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 波多野结衣一区麻豆| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 高清av免费在线| av在线app专区| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 丰满饥渴人妻一区二区三| 亚洲欧美精品自产自拍| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 亚洲精品一区蜜桃| 久久性视频一级片| 在线 av 中文字幕| 捣出白浆h1v1| 国产精品三级大全| 国产日韩欧美亚洲二区| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 欧美成人午夜精品| 精品国产一区二区三区久久久樱花| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 日韩欧美一区视频在线观看| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 亚洲精品在线美女| 精品福利永久在线观看| 天天躁日日躁夜夜躁夜夜| 国产亚洲av片在线观看秒播厂| 午夜福利,免费看| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 又大又黄又爽视频免费| 国产 精品1| 满18在线观看网站| 国产av国产精品国产| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 两性夫妻黄色片| 午夜激情av网站| 日韩熟女老妇一区二区性免费视频| av网站在线播放免费| 久久人人97超碰香蕉20202| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 欧美日韩av久久| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 亚洲视频免费观看视频| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 男女边摸边吃奶| 高清欧美精品videossex| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 天天影视国产精品| 国产麻豆69| 免费看av在线观看网站| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 国语对白做爰xxxⅹ性视频网站| 亚洲国产精品999| 2018国产大陆天天弄谢| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆| 免费人妻精品一区二区三区视频| av女优亚洲男人天堂| 中文字幕人妻丝袜制服| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o | 亚洲,一卡二卡三卡| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 亚洲国产中文字幕在线视频| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 久久性视频一级片| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 亚洲人成电影观看| 少妇 在线观看| 亚洲精品aⅴ在线观看| av电影中文网址| 大香蕉久久网| 国精品久久久久久国模美| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 国产精品国产三级国产专区5o| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 久久久久国产精品人妻一区二区| 纵有疾风起免费观看全集完整版| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 国产男女超爽视频在线观看| 嫩草影院入口| 看免费成人av毛片| 黄片播放在线免费| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看 | 国产精品.久久久| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 韩国精品一区二区三区| 少妇被粗大猛烈的视频| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 在线观看www视频免费| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 国产一级毛片在线| av福利片在线| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网 | 国产伦理片在线播放av一区| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 黄片小视频在线播放| 日本av手机在线免费观看| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 尾随美女入室| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| 尾随美女入室| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 九草在线视频观看| xxxhd国产人妻xxx| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| av天堂久久9| 另类亚洲欧美激情| 伦理电影免费视频| h视频一区二区三区| 熟女少妇亚洲综合色aaa.| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 国产色婷婷99| 最近最新中文字幕免费大全7| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 各种免费的搞黄视频| 国产亚洲精品第一综合不卡| e午夜精品久久久久久久| 久久久国产欧美日韩av| 中文字幕色久视频| 欧美精品高潮呻吟av久久| 777米奇影视久久| 久久精品熟女亚洲av麻豆精品| www.精华液| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 国产片内射在线| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 国产探花极品一区二区| 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 亚洲欧美清纯卡通| 亚洲av日韩在线播放| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 自线自在国产av| 久久久精品94久久精品| 久久国产精品大桥未久av| 久久人人爽人人片av| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 欧美老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 无限看片的www在线观看| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 国产成人系列免费观看| 欧美日韩视频高清一区二区三区二| 免费女性裸体啪啪无遮挡网站| 亚洲成人一二三区av| 日韩不卡一区二区三区视频在线| av在线老鸭窝| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 天堂俺去俺来也www色官网| 午夜福利乱码中文字幕| 激情五月婷婷亚洲| 在线天堂中文资源库| 美女福利国产在线| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区 | 精品视频人人做人人爽| av一本久久久久| av视频免费观看在线观看| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 欧美激情极品国产一区二区三区| 国产成人a∨麻豆精品| 大话2 男鬼变身卡| 在现免费观看毛片| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产| 免费观看a级毛片全部| 在线观看人妻少妇| 在线观看三级黄色| 国产成人午夜福利电影在线观看| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 免费高清在线观看日韩| 免费日韩欧美在线观看| 最新的欧美精品一区二区| 晚上一个人看的免费电影| 色婷婷av一区二区三区视频| 天天躁狠狠躁夜夜躁狠狠躁| 欧美少妇被猛烈插入视频| 人人妻人人爽人人添夜夜欢视频| 91精品国产国语对白视频| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 国产黄色视频一区二区在线观看| 两性夫妻黄色片| 亚洲国产精品国产精品| 亚洲国产欧美在线一区| 亚洲成人国产一区在线观看 | 丝袜脚勾引网站| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 老熟女久久久| 日韩av免费高清视频| 国产精品二区激情视频| 王馨瑶露胸无遮挡在线观看| 亚洲一码二码三码区别大吗| 国产精品一二三区在线看| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 青春草亚洲视频在线观看| 色94色欧美一区二区| 99久国产av精品国产电影| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 99久久人妻综合| 国产精品 欧美亚洲| 欧美日本中文国产一区发布| 亚洲综合精品二区| 国产精品 国内视频| 亚洲精品国产av蜜桃| 亚洲免费av在线视频| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 亚洲婷婷狠狠爱综合网| 美女大奶头黄色视频| 国产精品久久久久久久久免| 日日撸夜夜添| 97在线人人人人妻| 亚洲av电影在线进入| 亚洲精品日本国产第一区| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 日韩制服丝袜自拍偷拍| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办| 90打野战视频偷拍视频|