ArticleRadiology and oncology2018
Simultaneous Pure Laparoscopic Resection of Primary Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases: A Single Institution Experience with Propensity Score Matching Analysis.
Article in Radiology and oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 6 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic versus open resection of primary colorectal cancers and synchronous liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Pooled it
- SAGES/AHPBA guidelines for the use of minimally invasive surgery for the surgical treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Minimally invasive versus open hepatectomy for the resection of colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- Open Resection Compared to Mini-Invasive in Colorectal Cancer and Liver Metastases: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Laparoscopic procedure is associated with lower morbidity for simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an updated meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Mini-invasiveWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2019Pooled it
- Pushing boundaries: simultaneous minimal-invasive resection of complex colorectal liver metastases and its primary tumor.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- The impact of obesity on short-term outcomes after the laparoscopic liver resection: a single-institution experience.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2024Article
- Ranking as a Procedure for Selecting a Replacement Variable in the Score Predicting the Survival of Patients Treated with Curative Intent for Colorectal Liver Metastases.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Two-stage hepatectomy in resection of colorectal liver metastases - a single-institution experience with case-control matching and review of the literature.Radiology and oncology · 2023Review
- Totally laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: a single-center case series.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- The learning curve of laparoscopic liver resection utilising a difficulty score.Radiology and oncology · 2021Article
- The Italian Consensus on minimally invasive simultaneous resections for synchronous liver metastasis and primary colorectal cancer: A Delphi methodology.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the Iwate Model for Predicting the Difficulty of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Does Tumor Size Matter?Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Article
- Decision making process in simultaneous laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases. Review of literature.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2020Review
- The external validation of a difficulty scoring system for predicting the risk of intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resection.BMC 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study was to compare the outcome of pure laparoscopic and open simultaneous resection of both the primary colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM). PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom 2000 to 2016 all patients treated by simultaneous resection were assessed for entry in this single center, clinically nonrandomized trial. A propensity score matching was used to compare the laparoscopic group (LAP) to open surgery group (OPEN). Primary endpoints were perioperative and oncologic outcomes. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
resultsOf the 82 patients identified who underwent simultaneous liver resection for SCLM, 10 patients underwent LAP. All these consecutive patients from LAP were matched to 10 comparable OPEN. LAP reduced the length of hospital stay (P = 0.044) and solid food oral intake was faster (P = 0.006) in this group. No patient undergoing the laparoscopic procedure experienced conversion to the open technique. No difference was observed in operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, narcotics requirement, clinical risk score, resection margin, R0 resections rate, morbidity, mortality and incisional hernias rate. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of the 3-year OS rate (90 vs. 75%; P = 0.842) and DFS rate (60 vs. 57%; P = 0.724).
conclusionsLAP reduced the length of hospital stay and offers faster solid food oral intake. Comparable oncologic and survival outcomes can be achieved. LAP is beneficial for well selected patients in high volume centers with appropriate expertise.
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.