ReviewSurgery today2025
Surgical interpretation of the WHO subclassification of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a narrative review.
Review in Surgery today, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical management of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma: a narrative review of principles, technical nuances, and emerging strategies.Journal of liver cancer · 2026Review
- Molecular mechanisms and genetic features of cholangiocarcinoma: implications for targeted therapeutic strategies.Precision clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) has been subclassified by its gross morphology into the mass-forming (MF), periductal-infiltrating (PI), and intraductal growth (IG) types and their combinations. This classification correlates well with clinical features; for example, MF-iCCA has less lymph-node metastasis and a better prognosis than PI-iCCA. According to the recently accumulated evidence from histological investigations, the WHO classification endorsed a subclassification scheme in which iCCA cases are classified into small- and large-duct types. Small-duct iCCA is considered to originate from septal or smaller bile ducts and is characterized by less frequent lymph-node metastasis, a favorable prognosis, and an MF appearance. Large-duct iCCA arises around the second branch of the biliary tree and has more aggressive biology and distinct genetic abnormalities. According to the practice guidelines for iCCA from the Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, upfront surgery is recommended for iCCA without distant metastasis regardless of the morphological subtype, based on clinical experience. In consideration of the biological heterogeneity of iCCA, the treatment strategy for iCCA needs to be reconsidered based on the WHO subtypes.
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.