ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2022
Results of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma Resections: a Single-Center Analysis.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Oncologic Liver Resections in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Opportunities to Improve Evidence and Outcomes.Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIntrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is the second most common primary neoplasm of the liver after hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although an underlying cause is not usually found, liver flukes, cirrhosis, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and viral hepatitis have been found to increase the risk in recent years. In this study, we aimed to present our experience on ICC and compare the outcomes of patients with a concomitant liver pathology and with incidentally detected ICC. PATIENTS AND
methodsThirty-three patients who underwent surgical resection for ICC were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups, group one (with concomitant liver disease, n = 13) and group two (incidentally detected ICC, n = 18). Demographics, perioperative findings, pathological properties, recurrence rates, and survival rates were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the groups.
resultsThe mean age of patients was 59.77 ± 9.81 years, of whom sixteen (51.6%) were males. Thirteen patients (41.9%) had concomitant liver disease, the most common being chronic hepatitis B infection. Eighteen patients (58.1%) had incidentally detected ICC. There were no significant differences between the groups except for follow-up time and recurrence rate. The recurrence rate was significantly higher in the incidentally detected ICC group (61.1% versus 7.7%, p = 0.003). Follow-up time was significantly higher in patients with concomitant liver disease (42 versus 17.5 months, p = 0.007). The mortality rate was higher in the incidentally detected ICC group (55.6 to 23.1%, p = 0.071) but the difference did not reach statistical significance.
conclusionSurgical resection in ICC patients with underlying liver disease is associated with better prognosis than in incidentally detected ICC patients. Incidental ICC may be a different tumor with different biology, hence the high recurrence rates.
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.