ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2022
Laparoscopic isolated liver segmentectomy 8 for malignant tumors: techniques and comparison of surgical results with the open approach using a propensity score-matched study.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of Essential Liver Anatomy for Anatomical Segmentectomy 8: A Proposal for the Hybrid Glissonean Approach.World journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of Minimally Invasive Surgery on Anatomic Liver Segmentectomy Using the Extrahepatic Glissonean Approach.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnatomic isolated liver segmentectomy 8 (ILSeg8) for malignancies remains technically challenging. The feasibility, safety, and oncologic validity of laparoscopic ILSeg8 are undefined, and thus were evaluated in comparison with the open approach.
methodsThis study enrolled 35 open and 29 laparoscopic ILSeg8 cases of hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 47), metastatic liver tumors (n = 16), and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1) at our institution. The surgical techniques were based on the pre-hepatectomy extrahepatic Glissonian pedicle control, followed by cranial-to-caudal parenchymal dissection from the hepatic vein root side. The short- and long-term outcomes after ILSeg8 were retrospectively evaluated and compared between the open and laparoscopic approaches using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).
resultsBoth before and after PSM, the laparoscopic ILSeg8 group had significantly less blood loss, lower postoperative serum bilirubin level, and a shorter postoperative hospital stay than the open group. The overall survival rates were comparable between the laparoscopic and open groups before (P = 0.017) and after (P = 0.043) PSM, with the similar recurrence-free survival rates between the groups. In a multivariable analysis of the cohort before PSM (n = 64), the laparoscopic approach was identified to be an independent factor for favorable overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.20, P = 0.039).
conclusionLaparoscopic ILSeg8 using the extrahepatic Glissonian approach and hepatic vein root at first parenchymal dissection was feasible, safe, and oncologically acceptable. In ILSeg8 for malignancy, the laparoscopic approach potentially confers short-term advantages over the open approach with comparable long-term outcomes in select patients.
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.