ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Comparison of textbook outcomes between laparoscopic and open liver resection for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabolic burden but not metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease affects the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
- Definition and Classification of Minimally Invasive Major Hepatectomy (MIMH): A Literature Review and Expert Survey in the Fifth World Congress of the International Laparoscopic Liver Surgery (ILLS).Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Article
- Does calculating the textbook outcome based on its negative predictors enhance the transparency of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery assessment?Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2026Article
- A structured, indicator-driven quality improvement cycle is associated with improved adherence and outcomes after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with high-risk pathological features: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Using period analysis to timely provide serial data on long-term survival for liver cancer patients from China.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to clarify whether laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is better than open liver resection (OLR) concerning textbook outcome (TO) achievement for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
methodsData from HCC patients who underwent liver resection from a multicenter database were retrospectively reviewed (n = 2617). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline characteristics of the two groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the risk factors that are independently associated with TO.
resultsBefore PSM, more aggressive biological characteristics were observed in patients who underwent OLR. After PSM, 771 patients in each group were matched. The overall rate of TO achievement in patients with LLR (78.2%) was higher than that in patients with OLR (71.7%; P < 0.001) after PSM. Subgroup analysis further revealed that LLR was associated with a greater incidence of TO achievement than OLR was in patients who underwent minor liver resection (after PSM; LLR: 83.8% vs. OLR: 73.0%, respectively; P < 0.001) but was similar in those who underwent major liver resection (after PSM; LLR: 68.8% vs. OLR: 65.7%; P = 0.468). Multivariate logistic regression analysis suggested that the LLR (OR = 0.471, 95% CI 95% CI = 0.361-0.614, P < 0.001) was an independent protective factor against non-TO in patients who underwent minor liver resection but not in those who underwent major liver resection. After PSM, the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of patients who underwent OLR (74.6%) and LLR (73.9%) were similar (P = 0.485). Patients with TO had significantly better OS than those without TO, regardless of whether they underwent LLR (TO: 76.5% vs. non-TO: 65.7%, P = 0.005) or OLR (TO: 76.8% vs. non-TO: 69.1%, P = 0.042).
conclusionLLR favored TO achievement in HCC patients who received minor liver resection but not in those who underwent major liver resection. Patients who achieved TO had better OS regardless of LLR or OLR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39890613What 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.