Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32274625›Full record

ReviewSurgical endoscopy2020

A better route to ALPPS: minimally invasive vs open ALPPS.

Kawka Michal, Mak Sau, Gall M H Tamara, Jiao R Long

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Advanced robotic liver surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients with Advanced Colorectal Liver Metastasis: A Survival Analysis from the Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial LIGRO.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kawka MichalHPB Surgical Unit, Dept. of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0HS, UK.
Mak SauHPB Surgical Unit, Dept. of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0HS, UK.
Gall M H TamaraHPB Surgical Unit, Dept. of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0HS, UK.
Jiao R LongHPB Surgical Unit, Dept. of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, Du Cane Road, London, W12 0HS, UK. l.jiao@imperial.ac.uk.
Hammersmith Hospital · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssociating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) has gained both interest and controversy, as an alternative to portal vein embolisation (PVE) by inducing future liver remnant hypertrophy in patients at risk of liver failure following major hepatectomy. Open ALPPS induces more extensive hypertrophy in a shorter timespan than PVE; however, it is also associated with higher complication rates and mortality. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), with its known benefits, has been applied to ALPPS in the hope of reducing the surgical insult and improving functional recovery time while preserving the extensive FLR hypertrophy.

methodsA search of the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases was conducted on 10 July 2019. 1231 studies were identified and screened. 19 open ALPPS studies, 3 MIS ALPPS and 1 study reporting on both were included in the analysis.

results1088 open and 46 MIS-ALPPS cases were included in the analysis. There were significant differences in the baseline characteristic: open ALPPS patients had a more diverse profile of underlying pathologies (p = 0.028) and comparatively more right extended hepatectomies (p = 0.006) as compared to right hepatectomy and left extended hepatectomy performed. Operative parameters (time and blood loss) did not differ between the two groups. MIS ALPPS had a lower rate of severe Clavien-Dindo complications (≥ IIIa) following stage 1 (p = 0.063) and significantly lower median mortality (0.00% vs 8.45%) (p = 0.007) compared to open ALPPS.

conclusionAlthough MIS ALPPS would seem to be better than open ALPPS with reduced morbidity and mortality rates, there is still limited evidence on MIS ALPPS. There is a need for a higher quality of evidence on MIS ALPPS vs. open ALPPS to answer whether MIS ALPPS can replace open ALPPS.

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticFemaleHepatectomyHumansLigationLiverLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPortal VeinALPPSHepatectomyLaparoscopic surgeryMinimally invasive surgeryRALPPSRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID32274625
PMCPMC7214383
OpenAlexW3015967294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.