SynthesisMedicine2020
Treatment of solitary hepatocellular carcinoma up to 2 cm: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Grading severity of microscopic vascular invasion was independently associated with recurrence and survival following hepatectomy for solitary hepatocellular carcinoma.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2024Article
- Article
- Micronvasive behaviour of single small hepatocellular carcinoma: which treatment?Updates in surgery · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent years, there has been considerable uncertainty about the optimal treatment option for very early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with tumor size less than 2 cm. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of the different treatments.
methodsThis study was designed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched for calculating the survival rates, and the "time to event" method was used to compare the outcomes of liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). All studies focusing on the treatment of solitary HCC up to 2 cm by different techniques were included in our analysis. The Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) derived from multivariate and univariate analysis were utilized to assess the treatment risks.
resultsWe included 32 studies in our systematic review. The median 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival rate (RFS) for LR were 73% and 47%, respectively, and those for RFA were 73% and 43%, respectively. RFA was found to be associated with increased risk of mortality and recurrence compared to LR (HR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.35-1.92, P < .0001 for OS and HR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.56-1.96, P < .0001 for RFS).
conclusionOur meta-analysis demonstrated that LR is superior to RFA in the treatment of solitary HCC up to 2 cm, with reduction in mortality and recurrence risk and improved long-term outcome.
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.