ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Validation of a difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic liver resection in hepatolithiasis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a novel difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic liver resection procedure in patients with intrahepatic duct stones.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Laparoscopic left hemihepatectomy using augmented reality navigation plus ICG fluorescence imaging for hepatolithiasis: a retrospective single-arm cohort study (with video).Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Hepatolithiasis: Epidemiology, presentation, classification and management of a complex disease.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Review
- A proposed difficulty grading system for laparoscopic bile duct exploration: benefits to clinical practice, training and research.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- A novel difficulty scoring system of laparoscopic liver resection for liver tumor.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA difficulty scoring system (DSS) based on the extent of liver resection, tumor location, liver function, tumor size, and tumor proximity to major vessels was previously developed to assess the difficulty of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). Recently, we proposed a modified DSS for patients who undergo LLR for intrahepatic duct (IHD) stones. In this study, we validated the modified DSS for LLR for IHD stones.
methodsWe reviewed the clinical data of 121 patients who underwent LLR for IHD stones between July 2003 and November 2015 and validated the modified DSS in patients who underwent LLR according to their surgical outcomes. We divided the patients into subgroups according to their scores and compared the surgical outcomes, including hospital stay, operation time, blood loss, transfusion rate, and the postoperative complication rate and grade, among the subgroups of patients.
resultsThe DSS score ranged from 3 to 12 in LLR for IHD stones. The operation time (P < 0.001) significantly increased according to the DSS score. The median hospital stay after surgery (P = 0.024) and transfusion rate (P = 0.001) were significantly different among subgroups of patients divided by their difficulty scores. When we divided the patients into two groups based on the side of liver of resected, the operation time (P < 0.001), mean difficulty score (P < 0.001), and blood loss (P = 0.041) were greater in patients who underwent right liver resection.
conclusionsThe surgical difficulty varies among patients undergoing the same LLR procedure for IHD stones. The modified DSS for IHD stones can effectively predict the surgery outcomes and complications of LLR.
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.