ArticleAnnals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery2025
Parenchymal-sparing non-anatomic resection vs. classic anatomic resection in colorectal cancer liver metastases.
Article in Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The surgical perspective on CAIRO5 and beyond: all patients with colorectal liver metastases should be evaluated by a liver surgeon, but what defines resectability?Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgrounds/Aims: Although anatomical liver resection is considered more effective in preventing complications and recurrence in hepatocellular carcinoma, its efficacy has yet to be clearly defined in colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CLM). Methods: From January 2000 to December 2023, 145 patients underwent liver resections for CLM, divided into anatomic and non-anatomic resection cohorts. The dataset included demographic details, tumor size, number and distribution of metastases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, primary tumor location and stage, type of liver surgery, transfusion rates, duration of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and completeness of resection. Results: Of the 145 patients who underwent liver resections for metastases from colorectal cancer, 62 were in the anatomic group and 83 were in the non-anatomic group. The anatomic group had larger tumors (6.71 cm vs. 3.18 cm). Intraoperative transfusion rates were higher in the anatomic group (56.5% vs. 12.0%). Hospital stays, positive resection margin rates, and postoperative complication rates showed no significant differences. One surgery-related death occurred in the anatomic group. Disease-free and overall survival rates were comparable between groups. Conclusions: Anatomic liver resection did not demonstrate a reduction in recurrence or an improvement in survival rates compared to non-anatomic resection. As such, anatomical resection does not offer a
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.