ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic portal territory fluorescence navigation-guided anatomical liver resection in hepatocellular carcinoma patients.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical effectiveness of classic anatomical resection (CAR) of the liver for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been controversial. Laparoscopic Portal Territory fluorescence navigation-guided anatomical liver resection (LPTAR) has been increasingly applied in clinical practice. However, evidence on the safety and efficacy of LPTAR is lacking.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy from December 2018 to December 2022 was conducted. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to match patients who underwent LPTAR with patients who underwent CAR. Differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and perioperative data were evaluated between the LPTAR and CAR groups. Cox regression models were used for univariate and multivariate analyses, as well as subgroup analyses.
resultsOf the 234 patients included in this study, 70 underwent LRTAR, and 164 underwent CAR. After 1:1 PSM, each group contained 59 patients, and perioperative parameters were better in the LPTAR group. Specifically, the LPTAR group had wider resection margins (13.00 cm vs. 11.00 cm, P = 0.023), less blood loss (200 ml vs. 320 ml, P = 0.010), and fewer postoperative complications (33.90% vs. 57.62%, P = 0.016) than did the CAR group. The RFS rates of patients with HCC was also increased by LPTAR. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS rates of the LPTAR group were significantly higher than those of the CAR group (P = 0.002).
conclusionAccurate preoperative planning and standardized LPTAR technical criteria prolonged RFS in HCC patients, improved the safety of surgery, and reduced surgical stress. TRAIL REGISTRATION: The study has been prospective registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (https://www.chictr.org.cn/, ChiCTR2400087661).
Indexed as
Identifiers
40050494What 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.