ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Learning process of laparoscopic liver resection and postoperative outcomes: chronological analysis of single-center 15-years' experience.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in elderly patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Safety and outcomes of hemodilutional autologous transfusion in intermediate- to advanced-level liver resection: a prospective observational study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Nationwide implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery: population-based analysis.BJS open · 2025Article
- Towards a Standardization of Learning Curve Assessment in Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery.Annals of surgery · 2024Article
- Trends in long-term outcomes of patients with HCV-associated hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy: A comparison before and after introduction of direct-acting antivirus therapy.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Article
- A safe and simple exposure and Pringle maneuver in laparoscopic anatomical liver resection of segment 7.BMC gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Impact of liver volumetric regeneration on survival outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after major hepatectomy.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- Long-term oncological outcomes for HALS/Hybrid vs pure laparoscopic approach in colorectal liver metastases: a propensity score matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- A Conceptual Classification of Resectability for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.World journal of surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimited studies have reported the actual learning process of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). This study aimed to chronologically evaluate our 15 years' experience of LLR.
methodsAll consecutive LLRs between 2006 to 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. The time period was divided into three groups; first (2006-2010), second (2011-2015), and third (2016-2020) period. The primary endpoint of this study was a composite of overall (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II) or major (grade ≥ IIIa) postoperative complications within 30 days. Using the IWATE criteria (four difficulty levels based on six indices), LLR was categorized as basic (< 7 points) and advanced (≥ 7 points) one. All analyses were performed based on the intention-to-treat principles.
resultsDuring the study period, a total of 382 LLRs were gradually performed (first period, n = 54; second period, n = 114, and third period, n = 214). Low incidences of overall and major complications were maintained (9.3, 10.5, and 7.0%, p = 0.514, and 1.9, 2.6, and 2.3%, p = 1.000). Meanwhile, pure LLRs (i.e., LLRs without hand-assisted or hybrid approach) and advanced LLRs were increasingly performed in 25 (46.3%), 71 (62.3%), and 205 (95.8%) patients (p < 0.001) and 3 (5.6%), 18 (15.8%), and 58 (27.1%) patients (p < 0.001), respectively.
conclusionsThis study suggests that stepwise approach from basic to advanced procedures and use of hand-assisted or hybrid approach during the early phases for starting LLR practice may allow for maintaining low morbidity in specialized center.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34312730What 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.