ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
Pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy of living donor is feasible and safe: a preliminary comparative study in China.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Achievements, Challenges and Promises of Minimally Invasive Liver Transplantation.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2026Review
- Seven Cases of Living Parental Small Bowel Transplantation Donors: Perioperative Care in 3D Laparoscopic Live Donor Ileal Resection.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
- Post-living donor liver transplant biliary strictures: prevalence, predictors, and long-term outcomes in a retrospective study.Clinical transplantation and research · 2025Article
- Chinese guidelines for minimally invasive donor hepatectomy in living donor liver transplantation (2024 edition).Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2024Review
- LaparoscopicWorld journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
- Global dissemination of minimally invasive living donor hepatectomy: What are the barriers?World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Review
- Minimally Invasive Donors Right Hepatectomy versus Open Donors Right Hepatectomy: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Right Hepatectomy in Living Liver Donors: Graft Weight Discrepancy.Annals of transplantation · 2022Article
- Robotic Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Postoperative Health Status and Quality of Life After Pure Laparoscopic Donor Hepatectomy for Living Donor Liver Transplantation.Annals of transplantation · 2022Article
- Sarcopenia defined by psoas muscle index independently predicts long-term survival after living donor liver transplantation in male recipients.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic living-donor hepatectomy: Review of its current status.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2021Review
- Advances in the surgical outcomes of 300 cases of pure laparoscopic living donor right hemihepatectomy divided into three periods of 100 cases: a single-centre case series.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Pure Laparoscopic Living Donor Hepatectomy With/Without Fluorescence-Assisted Technology and Conventional Open Procedure: A Retrospective Study in Mainland China.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- Article
- Laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy in a donor with type III portal vein anomaly: A case report.Medicine · 2019Article
- Pure laparoscopic versus open donor hepatectomy for adult living donor liver transplantation - A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of minimal access surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe adoption of laparoscopic techniques for living donor major hepatectomy has been controversial issue. The aim of this study is to present the preliminary experience of laparoscopic right hepatectomy in China.
methodsAll the donors receiving right hepatectomy for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) were divided into three groups: pure laparoscopic right hepatectomy (PLRH) group, hand-assisted right hepatectomy (HARH) group and open right hepatectomy (ORH) group. We compared the perioperative data and surgical outcomes of donors and recipients among three groups.
resultsFrom November 2001 to May 2017, 295 donors have received right hepatectomy for LDLT in our center. Among them, 7 donors received PLRH, 26 donors received HARH and 262 donors received ORH. The operation time of PLRH group (509.3 ± 98.9 min) was longer than that of the HARH group (451.6 ± 89.7 min) and the ORH group (418.4 ± 81.1 min, p = 0.003). The blood loss was the least in the PLRH group (378.6 ± 177.1 mL), compared with that in the HARH group (617.3 ± 240.4 mL) and that in the ORH group (798.6 ± 483.7 mL, p = 0.0013). The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the PLRH group (7, 7-10 days) than that in the HATH group (8.5, 7.5-12 days) and ORH group (11, 9-14 days; p = 0.001). Only one donor had pleural effusion (Grade I) and another one experienced pulmonary infection (Grade II). One recipient (14.3%) in the PLRH group occurred hepatic venous stenosis.
conclusionsLaparoscopic approaches for right hepatectomy contribute to less blood loss, better cosmetic satisfaction, less severe complications, and faster rehabilitation. PLRH is a safe and feasible procedure, which must be performed in highly specialized centers with expertise of both LDLT and laparoscopic hepatectomy, and requires a hybrid-to-pure stepwise development.
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.