SynthesisHepatology international2024
Laparoscopic liver resection is superior to radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score-matched studies.
Synthesis in Hepatology international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the perioperative outcomes of robotic vs. open distal pancreatectomy: a meta-analysis of propensity-score-matched studies.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of the efficacy of laparoscopic hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective study.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Is laparoscopic hepatectomy superior to radiofrequency ablation in treating small hepatocellular carcinoma?Hepatology international · 2024Article
- Comparison of laparoscopic hepatectomy and radiofrequency ablation for small hepatocellular carcinoma patients: a SEER population-based propensity score matching study.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe approach in small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, no prospective randomized trials to compare ablative or surgical approaches. We compared the surgical and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in small HCC patients based on matched cohort studies that performed propensity score matching (PSM).
methodsWe systemically searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and the Chinese BioMedical Literature (CBM) databases. All published propensity score-matched studies that compared LH and RFA for small HCC were included in this study.
resultsEight studies with a total of 1273 small HCC cases were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that there was no significant difference in the 1- year overall survival (OS) rate between the two groups, whereas the LH group had significantly higher 3- year overall survival rate (RR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.20, p < 0.00001) as well as 1- and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates (RR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.22-1.42, p < 0.00001; RR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.46-1.90, p < 0.00001) than the RFA group. Meanwhile, the local recurrence rate and intrahepatic distant recurrence rate were significantly lower in the LH group than in the RFA group (RR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.20-0.42, p < 0.00001; RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92, p = 0.01). In comparison with the LH group, the RFA group had a lower incidence of overall and major postoperative complications (RR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.47-2.24, p < 0.00001; RR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.48-5.12, p = 0.001), but there was no significant difference in postoperative mortality between the two groups. In addition, further comparison of single postoperative complications showed that the incidence of ascites was lower in the RFA group than in the LH group (RR = 3.62, 95% CI 1.64-7.96, p = 0.001), whereas there was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative bleeding, abdominal infection and bile leakage between the two groups (RR = 3.50, 95% CI 0.74-16.61, p = 0.11; RR = 5.00, 95% CI 0.59-42.23, p = 0.14; RR = 4.00, 95% CI 0.45-35.23, p = 0.21). Besides, the hospital stay was shorter in the RFA group than in the LH group (MD = 4.29, 95% CI 2.06-6.53, p = 0.0002).
conclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrated that in comparison with RFA in the treatment of small HCC, LH provided superior long-term OS and DFS together with lower rates of local and intrahepatic distant recurrence after surgery. However, RFA was associated with better short-term outcomes.
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.