Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36917309›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023

Minimally invasive versus open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matching analysis of 224 patients.

Kam Cheung Wong, Kit Fai Lee, Eugene Y J Lo, Andrew K Y Fung, Hon Ting Lok, Sunny Y S Cheung, Kelvin K C Ng, John Wong, Paul B S Lai, Charing C N Chong

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. [Minimally invasive liver resection-New techniques].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kam Cheung WongDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Kit Fai LeeDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Eugene Y J LoDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Andrew K Y FungDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Hon Ting LokDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Sunny Y S CheungDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Kelvin K C NgDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
John WongDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Paul B S LaiDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Charing C N ChongDivision of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 30-32 Ngan Shing Street, Sha Tin, Hong Kong SAR, China. chongcn@surgery.cuhk.edu.hk.
Chinese University of Hong Kong · CNPrince of Wales Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the peri-operative and long-term survival outcomes of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) (robotic or laparoscopic) with open liver resection (OLR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

methodsData of patients who underwent liver resection for HCC were reviewed from a prospectively collected database. Outcomes of MILR were compared with those of OLR. A propensity score matching analysis with a ratio of 1:1 was performed to minimise the potential bias in clinical pathological factors.

resultsFrom January 2003 to December 2017, a total of 705 patients underwent liver resection for HCC. Amongst them, 112 patients received MILR and 593 patients received OLR. After propensity score matching, there were 112 patients in each of the MILR and OLR groups. Patients were matched by age, sex, hepatitis status, presence of cirrhosis, platelet count, albumin level, bilirubin level, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) level, alanine transferase (ALT) level, creatinine level, tumour differentiation, tumour size, tumour number, presence of tumour rupture, presence of vascular invasion, extent of liver resection (minor/major) and difficulty score. The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 94.4%, 90.4% and 82.3% in the MILR group vs 95.4%, 80.5% and 71.8% in the open group (p = 0.240). The 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 81.0%, 63.1% and 55.8% in the MILR group vs 79.1%, 58.1% and 45.7 in the open group (p = 0.449). The MILR group demonstrated significantly less blood loss (p < 0.001), less blood transfusion (p = 0.004), lower post-operative complications (p < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) when compared with the OLR group.

conclusionsOur data shows MILR yielded superior post-operative outcomes to OLR, with comparable survival outcomes.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularHepatectomyLiverAgedBlood TransfusionFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative HemorrhagePropensity ScoreHepatocellular carcinomaLaparoscopic liver resectionMinimally invasive liver resectionMinimally invasive surgeryRobotic liver resection

Identifiers

PMID36917309
OpenAlexW4324129729

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.