ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2020
Laparoscopic versus open liver resections of posterolateral liver segments - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minimizing blood loss and transfusion rate in laparoscopic liver surgery: a review.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Review
- Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis.Cancers · 2023Review
- Laparoscopic versus conventional open treatment of hepatic cystic hydatidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Review
- Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional video-assisted hepatectomy for liver disease: a meta-analysis of clinical data.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLaparoscopic resection has become an accepted approach to liver tumour surgery. However, it is considered difficult, especially in unfavourably located lesions.
aimTo compare the outcomes of laparoscopic (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) of posterolateral segments. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases from inception to 30 September 2019. Full text articles and conference abstracts were included for further analysis. This review follows the PRISMA guidelines.
resultsFrom 643 articles, 15 studies (N = 1196 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. All of them were non-randomised. Our findings showed that LLR had significantly lowered overall morbidity compared to OLR (MD = 0.66; 95% CI: 0.51-0.86; p = 0.002). Length of hospital stay (MD = 2.48; 95% CI: -3.87, -1.08; p < 0.001) was also shorter in the LLR group. Operative time (MD = 55.65; 95% CI: 24.14-87.16; p < 0.001) was significantly shorter in the OLR group. In terms of blood loss, major complications, R0 resection rates, and resection margin, there were no significant differences.
conclusionsOur meta-analysis showed that the laparoscopic approach to resections of posterolateral liver segments is beneficial. However, the results are based on non-randomised trials, and further research is needed to fully establish their clinical application.
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.