ArticleTranslational cancer research2022
Pure laparoscopic liver resection versus percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score and multivariate analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 5 of them syntheses 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, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma: A systemic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic liver resection is superior to radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies.Hepatology international · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of laparoscopic hepatectomy and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of small hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis.BMC surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation in patients with early and small hepatocellular carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis and meta-regression of observational studies.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Laparoscopic liver resection versus radiofrequency ablation for hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of the efficacy of laparoscopic hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective study.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- MRI Parameters and Clinicopathologic Features in Predicting Hepatocellular Carcinomas With Aggressive-Related Marker Expression, Defined by Epithelial Cell Adhesion Molecule and Glypican-3 Status.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Optimal treatment for small HCC (<3 cm): Resection, liver transplantation, or locoregional therapy?JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology · 2023Review
- Effect of rapid rehabilitation nursing on inflammation and liver function after laparoscopic radical resection of primary liver cancer.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), both laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) provided similar short-term advantages. However, there was no robust clinical trial comparing the efficacy of LLR and RFA especially for small HCC. This study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of LLR and RFA for patients with small HCC using a propensity score matching analysis to minimize potential selection bias. Factors affecting survival were then identified with multivariate analysis. Methods: All patients underwent RFA or LLR for small HCC [defined as Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage 0 or A, size ≤3 cm, ≤3 nodules on contrast CT scan or MRI with no evidence of macrovascular invasion] from April 2005 to August 2020 were included. Propensity score matching was conducted to match patients in the LLR group and RFA group. Prognostic indicators, i.e., age, gender, tumor size, tumor number, Child's grading, albumin, bilirubin, platelet count, international normalized ratio, alpha-fetoprotein level and presence of cirrhosis on imaging were chosen for propensity score calculation. The demographic data, tumor characteristics, operative data, post-operative outcomes and survival data of the two groups were compared. A multivariate analysis based on Cox regression was used to identify factors associated with survival. Results: Median follow-up was 34 months. LLR and RFA had similar overall survival (91.8% Conclusions: Both RFA and LLR are safe and feasible treatment options for patients with small HCC. LLR should be considered for patients with preserved liver function with a better disease-free survival; while RFA offered a comparable overall survival with less surgical trauma and shorter hospital stay.
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.