ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Transplantation vs resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with compensated liver function after downstaging therapy.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Liver transplantation vs liver resection in HCC: promoting extensive collaborative research through a survival meta-analysis of meta-analyses.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Resection or Transplant in Early Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- Review
- Neoadjuvant treatment strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021Review
- Analysis of socioeconomic status and other factors affecting patient-graft survival in patients undergoing liver transplantation.Hepatology forum · 2020Article
- Long-term outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma that underwent chemoembolization for bridging or downstaging.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Liver transplantation for hepatobiliary malignancies: a new era of "Transplant Oncology" has begun.Surgery today · 2017Review
- Severity of liver cirrhosis: a key role in the selection of surgical modality for Child-Pugh A hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of surgical oncology · 2015Review
- Strategies to improve outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving a liver transplantation.World journal of hepatology · 2015Review
- Role of hepatectomy for recurrent or initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of hepatology · 2014Review
- Immediate radical therapy or conservative treatments when meeting the Milan criteria for advanced HCC patients after successful TACE.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014Article
- Bridging and downstaging treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation.World journal of gastroenterology · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimOur study aimed to compare the results of liver transplantation (LT) and liver resection (LR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that met the Milan criteria after successful downstaging therapy.
methodsFrom February 2004 to August 2010, a consecutive series of 102 patients were diagnosed with advanced-stage HCC that met the modified UCSF down-staging protocol inclusion criteria. All of the patients accepted various down-staging therapies. The types and numbers of treatments were tailored to each patient according to the tumor characteristics, location, liver function and response. After various downstaging therapies, 66 patients had tumor characteristics that met the Milan criteria; 31 patients accepted LT in our center, and 35 patients accepted LR. The baseline characteristics, down-staging protocols, postoperative complications, overall survival and tumor free survival rate, and tumor recurrence rate were compared between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate the long-term overall survival and tumor-free survival rate. Meanwhile, a Cox proportional hazards model was used for the multivariate analyses of overall survival and disease-free survival rate.
resultsNo significant difference was observed between the LT and LR groups with respect to the down-staging protocol, target tumor characteristics, and baseline patient characteristics. Fifteen patients suffered various complications after LT, and 8 patients had complications after LR. The overall complication rate for the LT group was 48.4%, which was significantly higher than the LR group (22.9%) (P = 0.031). The overall in-hospital mortality in hospital for the LT group was 12.9% vs 2.9% for the LR group (P = 0.172). The overall patient survival rates at 1-, 3- and 5-years were 87.1%, 80.6% and 77.4%, respectively, after LT and 91.4%, 77.1% and 68.6%, respectively, after LR (P = 0.498). The overall 1-, 3- and 5-year tumor recurrence-free rates were also comparable (P = 0.656). Poorer tumor differentiation (P = 0.041) and a higher post-downstage alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) level (> 400 ng/mL) (P = 0.015) were the two independent risk factors for tumor recurrence in the LT and LR patients who accepted successful down-staging therapy.
conclusionDue to the higher postoperative morbidity and similar survival and tumor recurrence-free rates, LR might offer better or similar outcome over LT, but a larger number and further randomized studies may be needed in the future for drawing any positive conclusions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.