ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2023
A surgical strategy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma - the hilar first concept.
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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative analysis of survival outcomes and prognostic factors between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after surgical resection: a propensity score-matched study based on the SEER database.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2026Article
- Analysis of prognostic factors for R1/R2 resection in patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts in the Treatment of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Present and Prospects.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2026Review
- Textbook Outcome After Major Liver Resection for Primary and Secondary Liver Tumors at Specialized German Hepatobiliary Centers: Analysis of the StuDoQ Liver Registry.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- [Cholangiocarcinomas].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe present study assesses long-term overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) after curative resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA) depending on resection margin (RM) status and lymph node (LN) status.
methodsClinical data of all consecutively resected patients with ICCA at a single high-volume center between 2005 and 2018 were collected. Minimum follow-up was 36 months. Perioperative and long-term oncological outcome was assessed.
resultsOne hundred ninety-two cases were included in the analysis. Thirty- and 90-day-mortality was 5.2% (n = 10) and 10.9% (n = 21). OS was 26 months with 1-, 2-, and 5-year-OS rates of 72%, 53%, and 26%. One-, 2-, and 5-year-DFS rates were 54%, 42%, and 35% (N0 vs. N1: 29 vs. 9 months, p = 0.116). R1 was not found to be an independent risk factor for reduced survival in the overall cohort (p = 0.098). When differentiating according to the LN status, clear resection margins were significantly associated with increased DFS for N0 cases (50 months vs. 9 months, p = 0.004). For N1 cases, no significant difference in DFS was calculated for R0 compared to R1 cases (9 months vs. 9 months, p = 0.88). For N0 cases, clear resection margins > 10 mm were associated with prolonged OS (p = 0.048).
conclusionFor N1 cases, there was no significant survival benefit when comparing R0 versus R1, while the complication rate remained high for the extended resection types. In view of merging multimodal treatment, the hilar first concept assesses locoregional LN status for optimal surgical therapy.
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.