SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2019
Comparison of clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: The current standards and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
- Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis.Cancers · 2023Review
- Article
- Exploring Prognosis, Tumor Microenvironment and Tumor Immune Infiltration in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on ATF/CREB Transcription Factor Family Gene-Related Model.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparison of the short-term outcomes of open and laparoscopic hepatectomy in the treatment of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: a single-center retrospective study.Translational cancer research · 2022Article
- Article
- The role of re-resection in recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Article
- State-of-the-art surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic vs. Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Recurrent Liver Tumors: A Propensity Score-Matched Study and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC).
methodsPublished studies which investigated laparoscopic versus open liver resection for RHCC were identified, and meta-analysis was used for statistical analysis.
resultsSix studies were analyzed by meta-analysis method, and cumulative 335 cases were included in this study. Laparoscopic liver resection was performed in 145 cases, and open liver resection was performed in 190 cases. Meta-analysis showed that there was no difference in operative time and 90-day mortality between the laparoscopic group and the open group (p = 0.06 and p = 0.06 respectively); Nevertheless, compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group resulted in significantly lower rate of in-hospital complication (p < 0.0001), much less blood loss (p < 0.0001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.002).
conclusionLaparoscopic liver resection for RHCC offers a benefit of lower in-hospital complication rate, less blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stay, while similar operative time and 90-day mortality as the open liver resection. Laparoscopic liver resection is feasible with satisfactory postoperative outcomes and can be a safe alternative treatment strategy to open procedure for RHCC.
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.