ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022
The safety and feasibility of laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy vs. open approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in 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.
- ASO Author Reflections: How to Perform a Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy with Glissonean Approach and Modified Hanging Maneuver, Guided by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging-Guided Laparoscopic Right Posterior Sectionectomy with Glissonean Approach and Modified Hanging Maneuver.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Outcomes and Patient Selection in Laparoscopic vs. Open Liver Resection for HCC and Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis.Cancers · 2023Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy (LRPS) is one of the most technically challenging and potentially hazardous procedures in laparoscopic liver resection. Although some available literature works demonstrated the safety and feasibility of LRPS, these data are limited to reports from a single institution and a small sample size without support from evidence-based medicine. So, we performed a meta-analysis to assess further the safety and feasibility of LRPS by comparing it with open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS). Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for eligible studies comparing LRPS and open approaches. Random and fixed-effects models were used to calculate outcome measures. Results: Four studies involving a total of 541 patients were identified for inclusion: 250 in the LRPS group and 291 in the ORPS group. The postoperative complication and margin were not statistically different between the two groups (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.35, Conclusion: Data from currently available literature suggest that LRPS performed by an experienced surgeon is a safe and feasible procedure in selected patients and is associated with a reduction in the 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.