ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally invasive liver surgery for perihilar and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of textbook outcomes between laparoscopic and open liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic hepatectomy using indocyanine green attenuates postoperative inflammatory response for hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity score matching analysis.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Oncologic outcomes and survival of modern surgical approaches for gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST).Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- XCR1: A promising prognostic marker that pinpoints targeted and immune-based therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Current advances and future directions in combined hepatocellular and cholangiocarcinoma.Gastroenterology report · 2024Review
- Sintilimab plus bevacizumab followed by resection in intermediate-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase Ib clinical trial with biomarker analysis.BMJ oncology · 2024Article
- Clinical practice guidelines and real-life practice in hepatocellular carcinoma: A Chinese perspective.Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2023Review
- Radiomics Based on Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Preoperative Differentiation of Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma from Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Multi-Center Study.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has now been established as a safe and minimally invasive technique that is deemed feasible for treating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). However, the role of LLR in treating combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CC) patients has been rarely reported. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of LLR when compared with open liver resection (OLR) procedure for patients with cHCC-CC.
methodsA total of 229 cHCC-CC patients who underwent hepatic resection (34 LLR and 195 OLR patients) from January 2014 to December 2018 in Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University were enrolled and underwent a 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis between the LLR and OLR groups to compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) parameters were assessed by the log-rank test and the sensitivity analysis.
resultsA total of 34 LLR and 68 OLR patients were included after PSM analysis. The LLR group displayed a shorter postoperative hospital stay (6.61 vs. 8.26 days; p value < 0.001) when compared with the OLR group. No significant differences were observed in the postoperative complications' incidence or a negative surgical margin rate between the two groups (p value = 0.409 and p value = 1.000, respectively). The aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and inflammatory indicators in the LLR group were significantly lower than those in the OLR group on the first and third postoperative days. Additionally, OS and RFS were comparable in both the LLR and OLR groups (p value = 0.700 and p value = 0.780, respectively), and similar results were obtained by conducting a sensitivity analysis.
conclusionLLR can impart less liver function damage, better inflammatory response attenuation contributing to a faster recovery, and parallel oncologic outcomes when compared with OLR. Therefore, LLR can be recommended as a safe and effective therapeutic modality for treating selected cHCC-CC patients, especially for those with small tumors in favorable location.
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.