Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29384907›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

The hepatectomy efficacy of huge hepatocellular carcinoma and its risk factors: A meta analysis.

Lei Wang, Zhiqiang Liu, Xiaolong Liu, Yongyi Zeng, Jingfeng Liu

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Neoadjuvant treatment strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Prognostic Role of IL-18 in Various Human Cancers and Radiation Injuries: A Meta-Analysis.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Lei WangThe United Innovation of Mengchao Hepatobiliary Technology Key Laboratory of Fujian Province, Mengchao Hepatobiliary Hospital of Fujian Medical University The Liver Center of Fujian Province, Fujian Medical University Liver Disease Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, P. R. China.
Zhiqiang Liu
Xiaolong Liu
Yongyi Zeng
Jingfeng Liu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has always been a controversy on the hepatectomy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Therefore, we aim to explore the hepatectomy efficacy of huge HCC and its risk factors.

methodsA systematic research was performed using PubMed, MedLine, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library from their establishment to August 2017. The major endpoints were overall survival (OS) rate and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rate, and the secondary ones were the morbidity of complications and mortality of hepatectomy.

resultsAbout 13 studies with a total of 7609 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The hepatectomy efficacy of huge HCC was inferior to non-huge HCC both in OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.90-2.50, P < .00001; I = 66%, P = .003) and RFS (HR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.76-2.19, P < .00001; I = 74%, P = .0001). However, the risk difference[RD] of the 1-year, 3-year and 5-year OS tended to be acceptable (RD = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.11-0.00, P = .05; RD = -0.13, 95% CI = -0.21--0.05, P = .002; RD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.19--0.01, P = .03; respectively). Moreover, there were also no significant differences between huge HCC and non-huge HCC in the morbidity of complication and mortality of hepatectomy (RD = 0.07, 95% CI = -0.09-0.23, P = .38; RD = -0.01, 95% CI = -0.00--0.03, P = .06; respectively). Related risk factors were measured to explore the differences, and the results showed that the level of alpha fetal protein (AFP) and the margin-positive rate were higher (standard mean difference [SMD] = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.26-0.88, P = .0003; odd radio[OR] = 32.52, 95% CI = 1.02-6.22, P = .04; respectively), the characteristic of huge HCC tended to be worse such as lower clinical or pathological stage, incomplete capsule and incorporate satellite metastases (OR = 2.91, 95% CI = 1.68-5.04, P = .001; OR = 3.99, 95% CI = 3.40-4.67, P < .00001; OR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.66-3.83, P < .0001; respectively), and the rate of micorvascular invasion (MVI) including portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT) were higher (OR = 3.36, 95% CI = 1.61-7.02, P = .001; OR = 2.75, 95% CI = 2.29-3.31, P < .00001; respectively) in the huge HCC.

conclusionThe hepatectomy efficacy of huge HCC was inferior to non-huge HCC, but its survival benefits and feasibility were confirmed in this meta-analysis. In addition, higher level of AFP, positive margin, lower clinical or pathological stage, incomplete capsule, incorporate satellite metastasis and MVI were significantly correlated with poor OS.

Indexed as

HepatectomyCarcinoma, HepatocellularHumansLiver NeoplasmsRisk FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID29384907
PMCPMC6392948

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.