Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39192042›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for huge hepatocellular carcinoma (≥ than 10 cm): a retrospective analysis from a high-volume referral center.

Gianluca Cassese, Ho-Seong Han, Boram Lee, Hae Won Lee, Jai Young Cho

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Gianluca CasseseDepartment of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Division of HBP Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, Transplantation Service, Federico II University Hospital, Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9185-2054
Ho-Seong HanDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. hanhs@snubh.org.
Boram LeeDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
Hae Won LeeDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
Jai Young ChoDepartment of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is still poor evidence about the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for huge (> 10 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC). The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term outcomes of LLR versus open liver resection (OLR) for patients with huge HCC from real-life data from consecutive patients.

methodsData regarding all consecutive patients undergoing liver resection for huge HCC were retrospectively collected from a Korean referral HPB center. Primary outcomes were the postoperative results, while secondary outcomes were the oncologic survivals.

resultsSixty-three patients were included in the study: 46 undergoing OLR and 17 LLR. Regarding postoperative outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences in estimated blood loss, operation time, transfusions, postoperative bile leak, ascites, severe complications, and R1 resection rates. After a median follow-up of 48.4 (95% CI 8.9-86.8) months, there were no statistically significant differences in 3 years OS (59.3 ± 8.7 months vs. 85.2 ± 9.8 months) and 5 years OS (31.1 ± 9 months vs. 73.1 ± 14.1 months), after OLR and LLR, respectively (p = 0.10). Similarly, there was not a statistically significant difference in both 3 years DFS (23.5% ± 8.1 months vs. 51.6 ± months) and 5 years DFS (15.7 ± 7.1 months vs. 38.7 ± 15.3 months), respectively (p = 0.13), despite a potential clinically significant difference.

conclusionLLR for huge HCC may be safe and effective in selected cases. Further studies with larger sample size and more appropriate design are needed to confirm these results.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularHepatectomyLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleHospitals, High-VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeHepatocellular carcinomaHuge hepatocellular carcinomaLaparoscopic liver resectionMinimally invasive liver surgery

Identifiers

PMID39192042
PMCPMC11525279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.