ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Effects of Anatomical or Non-Anatomical Resection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma on Survival Outcome.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncological outcomes of anatomic versus non-anatomic resections for small hepatocellular carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity-score matched studies.World journal of surgical oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of Anatomical and Non-Anatomical Resection in Low Microvascular Invasion Risk Solitary Hepatocellular Carcinoma ≤ 5 cm.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Anatomical versus Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy for Early-Stage Perihilar Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Article
- Survival Benefit and Safety of Anatomic Resection in Cirrhotic Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Propensity-Matched Analysis of 1699 Patients.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Recurrence and survival after robotic vs laparoscopic liver resection in very-early to early-stage (BCLC 0-A) hepatocellular carcinoma.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Observational
- Outcomes of liver resection and transarterial chemoembolization in patients with multinodular BCLC-A hepatocellular carcinoma.Journal of liver cancer · 2024Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Anatomical versus Non-Anatomical Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2024Article
- The Comparison of Surgical Margins and Type of Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Microvascular Invasion.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Recent Advances.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The relative benefit of anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This study compared the survival outcomes and recurrence rates of HCCs analysed according to tumour size and the extent of resection. Methods: Consecutive patients with HCC who underwent curative resection at Asan Medical Center between January 1999 and December 2009 were included in this study. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) according to tumour size to compare the survival outcomes between AR and NAR. A total of 986 patients were analysed; 812 and 174 patients underwent AR and NAR, respectively. Results: Before PSM, regardless of tumour size, the AR group demonstrated significantly better 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) than the NAR group (p < 0.001). After PSM, the AR group demonstrated better OS and RFS rates than the NAR group when tumour size was less than 5 cm, but there was no significant difference in the OS and RFS rates between the two groups when tumour size was equal to or greater than 5 cm. In tumours less than 5 cm in size, AR was the most significant factor associated with OS and RFS. However, this prognostic effect of AR was not demonstrated in tumours with sizes equal to or greater than 5 cm. Conclusion: In patients with HCCs smaller than 5 cm, AR reduced the risk of tumour recurrence and improved OS. In HCCs larger than 5 cm, AR and NAR showed comparable survival outcomes.
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.