[Liver resection: Part I. Anatomy and operative planning].

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. [Liver transection: modern procedure: Technique, results and costs].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015
   Review
2. [Vascular management in anatomical liver resection].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015
   Review
3. Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma beyond Milan Criteria: Multidisciplinary Approach to Improve Outcome.ISRN hepatology · 2014
   Review
4. [Indications and operative procedures for neuroendocrine liver metastases].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2009
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as