Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39123182›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2024

Comparison of percutaneous microwave/radiofrequency ablation liver partition and portal vein embolization versus transarterial chemoembolization and portal vein embolization for planned hepatectomy with insufficient future liver remnant.

Tai-Wei Ye, Tian-Wei Fu, Cheng-Fei Du, Ru-Chi Yue, Qi-Tao Jiang, Zhi-Hang Zhong, Qin Zhao, Cheng-Wu Zhang, Jie Liu, Jun-Wei Liu and 5 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

15 authors.

Tai-Wei Ye *General Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Tian-Wei Fu *General Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Cheng-Fei Du *General Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Ru-Chi Yue *Three Gorges University, Yichang, Hubei, 443000, China.
Qi-Tao JiangGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Zhi-Hang ZhongGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Qin ZhaoDalian Medical University, Dalian, Liaoning, 116000, China.
Cheng-Wu ZhangGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Jie LiuGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Jun-Wei LiuGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Zu-Yan LuoGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
Xiao-Ming FanGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
De-Fei HongDepartment of General Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine(DeFei Hong), No.3 East Qingchun Road, Hangzhou, 310016, Zhejiang, China.
Jian ChengGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China. chengj0523@163.com.
Zun-Qiang XiaoGeneral Surgery, Department of Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Surgery and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Cancer Center, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China. zqxiao@zcmu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn China, both percutaneous microwave/radiofrequency ablation liver partition plus portal vein embolization (PALPP) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus portal vein embolization (PVE) have been utilized in planned hepatectomy. However, there is a lack of comparative studies on the effectiveness of these two techniques for cases with insufficient future liver remnant (FLR).

methodsPatients were categorized into either the PALPP group or the TACE + PVE group. Clinical data, including FLR growth rate, complications, secondary resection rate, and overall survival rate, were compared and analyzed for both groups retrospectively.

resultsBetween December 2014 and October 2021, a total of 29 patients underwent TACE + PVE (n = 12) and PALPP (n = 17). In the TACE + PVE group, 7 patients successfully underwent two-stage hepatectomy, while in the PALPP group, 13 patients underwent the procedure (two-stage resection rate: 58.3% vs. 76.5%, P = 0.42). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications of one-stage procedures (11.8% vs. 8.3%, P > 0.05) and second-stage resection complication (0% vs. 46.2%, P = 0.05) between the TACE + PVE and PALPP groups. However, the PALPP group demonstrated a shorter time to FLR volume growth for second-stage resection (18.5 days vs. 66 days, P = 0.001) and KGR (58.5 ml/week vs. 7.7 ml/week, P = 0.001).

conclusionsCompared with TACE + PVE, PALPP results in a more significant increase in FLR volume and a higher rate of two-stage resection without increasing postoperative complications.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularChemoembolization, TherapeuticHepatectomyLiver NeoplasmsMicrowavesPortal VeinRadiofrequency AblationAdultAgedChinaCombined Modality TherapyEmbolization, TherapeuticFemaleHumansLiverMaleFuture liver remnantLiver partitionMicrowave/radiofrequency ablationPlanned hepatectomyPortal vein mbolizationTransarterial chemoembolization

Identifiers

PMID39123182
PMCPMC11312699

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.