ArticlePerioperative medicine (London, England)2017
Comparison of risk-scoring systems in the prediction of outcome after liver resection.
Article in Perioperative medicine (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictors of Postoperative Morbidity in Hepatic Hemangioma Surgery: A Single-Center Experience.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Defining and predicting textbook outcomes for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: analysis of factors improving achievement of desired postoperative outcomes.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2024Article
- Is a guideline required to predict the intensive care unit need of patients over 65 years of age during the pre-operative period? A comparison of the American Society of Anesthesiologists, lung ultrasound score, Charlson age-added comorbidity index, surgi.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2023Article
- Article
- Surgical treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A comprehensive review of current recommendations.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Review
- The accuracy of pre-operative (P)-POSSUM scoring and cardiopulmonary exercise testing in predicting morbidity and mortality after pancreatic and liver surgery: A systematic review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Review
- Strategies for the delay of surgery in the management of resectable hepatobiliary malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2020Review
- Surgical techniques and strategies for the treatment of primary liver tumours: hepatocellular and cholangiocellular carcinoma.European surgery : ACA : Acta chirurgica Austriaca · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk prediction techniques commonly used in liver surgery include the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grading, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET). This study compares the utility of these techniques along with the number of segments resected as predictive tools in liver surgery.
methodsA review of a unit database of patients undergoing liver resection between February 2008 and January 2015 was undertaken. Patient demographics, ASA, CCI and CPET variables were recorded along with resection size. Clavien-Dindo grade III-V complications were used as a composite outcome in analyses. Association between predictive variables and outcome was assessed by univariate and multivariate techniques.
resultsOne hundred and seventy-two resections in 168 patients were identified. Grade III-V complications occurred after 42 (24.4%) liver resections. In univariate analysis of CPET variables, ventilatory equivalents for CO
conclusionsOf the techniques evaluated, resection size provides the simplest and most discriminating predictor of significant complications following liver surgery.
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.