ArticleCurrent medical science2019
Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs. Open Hepatectomy for Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Prospective Comparative Study.
Article in Current medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic Electrocardiogram under P Wave Detection Algorithm Combined with Low-Dose Betaloc in Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Arrhythmia after Hepatocarcinoma Resection.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Trial
- Feasibility of robotic liver resection compared with laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Value of Preoperative Hematological Parameters in the Prognosis of Gastric Cancer Patients Undergoing a Total Gastrectomy.Current medical science · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of surgical resection for complicated liver cancer and its influencing factors: A retrospective study.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- Three Different Ways of Treating Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma at an Early Stage: A Prospective Comparative Study.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) is a newly developed technique associated with advantages as open surgery, but the study on outcome of liver function recovery was scarce. This preliminary report was aimed to comparatively assess the short-term outcomes between LH and open hepatectomy (OH) for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (PHC). This study retrospectively analyzed the demographic data and short-term outcomes of 81 patients who underwent LH or OH for the primary treatment of PHC between Oct. 2017 and May 2018 at Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (China). A total of 81 PHC patients who received major liver resection were enrolled. There were 38 (47%) patients in the LH group and 43 (53%) patients in the OH group. The operative time was significantly longer (373.53±173.38 vs. 225.43±55.08, P<0.01), and hospital stay (17.34±5.93 vs. 21.70±6.89, P=0.003), exhaust time (2.32±0.62 vs. 3.07±0.59, P<0.01) and defecation time (2.92±0.78 vs. 3.63±0.58, P<0.01) were significantly shorter in LH group than in OH group. The recovery of liver function was significantly faster in LH group, including higher serum albumin (P=0.002), higher ratio of albumin/globulin (P=0.029) and lower direct bilirubin (P=0.001) than in OH group. It is suggested that LH can serve as a fast recovery and cheap surgical procedure in the treatment of PHC, which is safe and feasible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31612396What 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.