ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Our experience of repeat laparoscopic liver resection in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility of liver surface-guided encirclement of hepatoduodenal ligament for the Pringle maneuver in minimally invasive repeat liver resection.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Short-term Outcomes and Difficulty of Repeat Laparoscopic Liver Resection.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2022Article
- Is minimally invasive liver surgery a reasonable option in recurrent HCC? A snapshot from the I Go MILS registry.Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Application of Laparoscopic Radical Resection for Type III and IV Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma Treatment.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRepeat liver resection is an effective treatment approach for patients with recurrent hepatocellular cell carcinoma (HCC). However, the surgical feasibility and oncological significance of repeat laparoscopic liver resection (r-LLR) remain unproven. This study evaluates and compares the clinical outcomes of non-anatomic r-LLR applied towards recurrent HCC, with those of primary LLR (p-LLR) for primary HCC.
methodsThis retrospective study reports 104 patients with HCC, treated with LLR between 2014 and 2018. Twenty eight of these patients underwent r-LLR for recurrent HCC. The clinical and surgical variables were reviewed for all cases.
resultsThe analysis was limited to non-anatomic resection across both groups (r-LLR: 89% (25/28) vs. p-LLR: 80% (61/76)). There were no statistically significant differences about patient background between the two groups, with the exception of Child-Pugh classification. r-LLR surgical techniques included single-site laparoscopic adhesiolysis (32%, 8/25), Pringle maneuver (8%, 2/25), and crush-clamp method using BiClamp for hepatic parenchymal transection (72%, 18/25). No severe postoperative complications were observed in the r-LLR group. Postoperative hospital stays and procedure-related postoperative survival were similar for both groups.
conclusionsNon-anatomical r-LLR renders comparable surgical and oncological outcomes. Our data suggest that non-anatomical r-LLR is a safe and feasible therapeutic approach to recurrent HCC.
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.