ReviewArchives of medical science : AMS2017
Laparoscopic and open liver resection - a literature review with meta-analysis.
Review in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic minor hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2021Pooled it
- From difficulty score to clinical outcome: Evaluating IWATE-criteria correlation with postoperative complications and revision surgery in anatomical liver resection.Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026Article
- Possibility of incorrect evaluation of intraoperative blood loss during open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- Enhanced recovery after surgery in primary liver cancer patients undergoing hepatectomy: experience from a large tertiary hospital in China.BMC surgery · 2023Article
- Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis.Cancers · 2023Review
- Robotic hepatic surgery in malignancy: review of the current literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2019Review
- Fully robotic left hepatectomy for malignant tumor: technique and initial results.Updates in surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn recent years laparoscopic approach to liver resections has gained important attention from surgeons worldwide. The aim of this review was to compare the results of laparoscopic and open liver resections. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe have performed a search in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases. Studies comparing laparoscopic and open liver resections were included.
resultsNo randomized clinical trial were identified. In the 16 observational studies included in the analysis there were 927 laparoscopic and 1049 open liver resections. The laparoscopy group had lower blood loss (MD = 244.93 ml,
conclusionsLaparoscopic resection of liver yields complications rates comparable to open resection, but the results are based on low quality evidence from nonrandomised studies.
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.