Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39982524›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2025

Which technical difficulty score can best predict postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive liver resections?

Louisa Bolm, Martina Nebbia, Onofrio Catalano, Gabriella Lionetto, Johanna von Bresinsky, Jannis Duhn, Shahrzad Arya, Marco Ventin, Julia Straesser, Cristina R Ferrone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Louisa BolmDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Martina NebbiaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Onofrio CatalanoDepartment of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Gabriella LionettoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Johanna von BresinskyDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany.
Jannis DuhnDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany.
Shahrzad AryaDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Marco VentinDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Julia StraesserDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Cristina R FerroneDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Cristina.Ferrone@cshs.org.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft,Germany Bo 5659
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo assess technical difficulty scores for laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) in a large well-characterized cohort of low to high difficulty LLR.

methodsPatients undergoing LLR and open liver resection (OLS) (2007-2022) at Massachusetts General Hospital were included. Patients were classified according to the technical difficulty scores Ban difficulty score, IWATE criteria, Hasegawa score, IMM score, and Southhampton score (SHH) and calibration of these scores in predicting postoperative outcome parameters was assessed.

results301 patients underwent LLR. Median age was 59 years and 58.5% of the patients were female. Median lesion size was 42.2 mm, median operative time was 197.7 min, and median estimated blood loss was 400.5 ml. According to the different scoring systems, 18.9% (SHH) to 52.2% (IWATE) of the LLR were high difficulty. Overall intraoperative events according to the modified Satava classification grade II (6.6%) and grade III (2.7%) were low as was postoperative 90 days major morbidity (5.3%) and mortality (1.0%). The respective scores' calibration for predicting non-textbook outcomes, intraoperative events, operative time, major postoperative morbidity, blood transfusion rates, and length of hospital stay was moderate to good for the respective scores and best for the IWATE criteria. DISCUSSION: Even high technical difficulty LLR can be performed with low postoperative morbidity and mortality rates. The scores evaluated performed well in predicting major liver surgery outome parameters. Among the different difficulty scoring systems, the IWATE criteria performed best.

Indexed as

HepatectomyLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsPostoperative ComplicationsAdultAgedFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopic liver resectionLiver surgeryTechnical difficulty

Identifiers

PMID39982524
PMCPMC11845553

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.