Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36520225›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a single center propensity-score-matching comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and long-term survival.

Wethit Dumronggittigule, Ho-Seong Han, Chulaluk Komoltri, Mizelle D'Silva, Boram Lee, Jai Young Cho

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Wethit DumronggittiguleDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 300 Gumidong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-70, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Ho-Seong HanDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 300 Gumidong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-70, Gyeonggi-do, Korea. hanhs@snubh.org.ORCID 0000-0001-9659-1260
Chulaluk KomoltriResearch Department, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Mizelle D'SilvaDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 300 Gumidong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-70, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Boram LeeDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 300 Gumidong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-70, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Jai Young ChoDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, 300 Gumidong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, 463-70, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
Seoul National University Bundang Hospital · KRSiriraj Hospital · THJaslok Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough the benefits of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in most circumstances are evident, the benefits for large HCC are contentious. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and survival after LH versus open hepatectomy (OH) in large HCC patients.

methodsAn analysis of prospectively maintained database included 215 hepatectomies for large HCC (diameter ≥ 5 cm). The operative and survival outcomes were compared between the LH group (n = 109) and the OH group (n = 106). Propensity score matching (PSM) 1:1 included 70 patients in each group. The entire cohort multivariable analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with surgical complications and suboptimal recurrence-free survival (RFS).

resultsAfter PSM, baseline characteristics and the extent of liver resection were similar in both groups. The LH group had a shorter hospital stay than the OH group (7 vs 9.5 days, p = 0.001). The R0 resection rate, complication rate, overall survival, and RFS were similar between the groups. The multivariate analyses revealed two independent factors predicting surgical complication (major resection; p < 0.001 and large volume blood loss; p = 0.042), and 3 independent factors predicting suboptimal RFS including R1 resection (p = 0.011), multifocal HCC (p = 0.005), and microvascular invasion (p = 0.001). LH was not associated with surgical complication and suboptimal RFS.

conclusionOur study highlights the benefits of LH by improving the perioperative outcomes, without long-term survival inferiority in selected large HCC patients compared with conventional OH. LH can be an attractive option for large HCC treatment.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsHepatectomyHumansLength of StayPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeHepatectomyHepatocellular carcinomaLaparoscopic liver resection

Identifiers

PMID36520225
OpenAlexW4311582515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.