ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
A propensity-matched study of full laparoscopic versus hand-assisted minimal-invasive liver surgery.
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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Laparoscopic versus robotic major hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Pooled it
- Experience-based transition to robotic surgery in an experienced program in minimally invasive hepatobiliary surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- The Outcome of Conversion to Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery in Laparoscopic Liver Resection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic-assisted and hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection versus pure laparoscopic liver resection: an international multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Long-term oncological outcomes for HALS/Hybrid vs pure laparoscopic approach in colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Pure laparoscopic vs. hand-assisted liver surgery for segments 7 and 8: propensity score matching analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Minimally invasive liver surgery: the Charité experience.Turkish journal of surgery · 2021Review
- Predicting the Risk of Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Resection of Primary Liver Tumors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Is Superior to Open Liver Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastases in the Posterosuperior Segments.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- Minimal-Invasive Versus Open Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: Bicentric Analysis of Postoperative Outcomes and Long-Term Survival Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Laparoscopic liver resection: indications, limitations, and economic aspects.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe implications of multi-incision (MILS) and hand-assisted (HALS) laparoscopic techniques for minimally invasive liver surgery with regard to perioperative outcomes are not well defined. The purpose of this study was to compare MILS and HALS using propensity score matching.
methods309 patients underwent laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) between January 2013 and June 2018. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed after a 1:1 propensity score match. Subgroup analyses of matched groups, i.e., radical lymphadenectomy (LAD) as well as resections of posterosuperior segments (VII and/or VIII), were performed.
resultsMILS was used in 187 (65.2%) and HALS in 100 (34.8%) cases, with a significant decrease of HALS resections over time (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences with regard to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Score, previous abdominal surgery and cirrhosis between both groups. Patients scheduled for HALS were characterized by a significantly higher rate of malignant tumors (p < 0.001) and major resections (p < 0.001). After propensity score matching (PMS), 70 cases remained in each group and all preoperative variables as well as resection extend were well balanced. A significantly higher rate of radical LAD (p = 0.039) and posterosuperior resections was found in the HALS group (p = 0.021). No significant differences between the matched groups were observed regarding operation time, conversion rate, frequency of major complications, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, overall hospital stay and R1 rate.
conclusionOur analysis suggests MILS and HALS to be equivalent regarding postoperative outcomes. HALS might be particularly helpful to accomplish complex surgical procedures during earlier stages of the learning curve.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32347389What 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.