ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2022
Short-term Outcomes and Difficulty of Repeat Laparoscopic Liver Resection.
Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 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.
- Utility of liver surface-guided encirclement of hepatoduodenal ligament for the Pringle maneuver in minimally invasive repeat liver resection.World journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Exploring the potential utility of modified difficulty scores based on the IWATE criteria for assessing the surgical difficulty of laparoscopic repeat liver resection.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the feasibility of repeat laparoscopic liver resection (Rep-LLR), including repeat anatomical resection (Rep-AR), as compared to initial-LLR (Ini-LLR). Background: The indications of LLR have expanded to treatment of recurrent liver tumors. However, the feasibility of Rep-LLR, including Rep-AR, has not yet been adequately assessed. Methods: Data of 297 patients who had undergone LLR were reviewed. Among the 297 patients, 235 (AR: 168) had undergone Ini-LLR and 62 (AR: 27) had undergone Rep-LLR, and the surgical outcomes were compared between the groups. In addition, multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of the difficulty of Rep-LLR based on the operation time and volume of blood loss. Results: Of the 62 patients who had undergone Rep-LLR, 44, 14, and 4 had undergone second, third, and fourth repeat LRs, respectively. No significant intergroup differences were observed in regard to the operation time, blood loss, conversion rate to open surgery, postoperative morbidity, or postoperative hospital stay. However, the proportion of patients in whom the Pringle maneuver was used was significantly lower in the Rep-LLR group than in the Ini-LLR group. Multivariate analysis identified surgical procedure ≥sectionectomy at the initial/previous LR and an IWATE difficulty score of ≥6 as being independent predictors of the difficulty of Rep-LLR. Use of adhesion barriers at the initial/previous LR was associated with a decreased risk of failure to perform the Pringle maneuver during Rep-LLR. Conclusions: Rep-LLR can offer outcomes comparable to those of Ini-LLR over the short term.
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.