Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38989162›Full record

ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2024

Comparison of the benefits and risks of hemihepatic inflow occlusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lianming Guo, Weiqiang Gong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Lianming GuoDepartment of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery, Weifang People's Hospital, Weifang, Shandong Province, China.
Weiqiang GongDepartment of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery, Weifang People's Hospital, Weifang, Shandong Province, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Application of hemihepatic inflow occlusion (HIO) and total hepatic inflow occlusion (TIO) are two common approaches for hepatectomy. However, their efficacy and safety remain controversial. Methods: Randomized control trials (RCTs) published before 15t January 2023 were included by a systematic literature search, which compared the clinical outcomes between HIO and TIO. The primary outcome was the estimated blood loss (EBL). Three independent authors screened and extracted the data and resolved disagreements by consensus. The ROB2.0 tool was used for evaluating the risk of bias. Results: A total of 1026 patients (511 TIO and 515 HIO) from 9 studies were analyzed in the meta-analyses. The EBL between TIO and HIO group was similar, while HIO was associated with a lower proportion of patients required transfusion ( Conclusions: Comparing with the TIO, HIO increased the operative time and failed to further reduce the EBL in patients with liver surgery. However, despite the complexity of the operation, HIO was recommended due to the similar effect on the consumption of blood products and the postoperative complications.

Indexed as

hepatic inflow occlusionmeta-analysispostoperative complication

Identifiers

PMID38989162
PMCPMC11230829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.