ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Laparoscopic versus open secondary hepatectomy treating postoperative regional recurrent hepatolithiasis: a multicenter real-world study.
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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHepatectomy is the primary treatment for regional hepatolithiasis, but recurrence rates range from 10 to 20%, often necessitating repeat surgery. Although laparoscopic hepatectomy has been widely adopted for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma, its use in recurrent hepatolithiasis remains limited due to technical challenges, including severe adhesions, anatomical distortions, and increased risks of complications. No large-scale study has compared laparoscopic and open repeat hepatectomy for recurrent regional hepatolithiasis.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective study included 913 patients from nine high-volume centers in southeastern China between May 2014 and 2023. Patients were divided into laparoscopic (n = 338) and open surgery (n = 575) groups. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline characteristics. Primary outcomes included stone clearance rates and textbook outcomes (TO), a composite measure assessing final stone clearance, hospital stay, bile leakage, major complications, and 30-day readmissions. Secondary outcomes included perioperative metrics, complication rates, and recurrence-free survival.
resultsAfter PSM, laparoscopic surgery demonstrated comparable immediate stone clearance rates (81.07% vs. 78.40%, p = 0.386) but significantly better TO rates (61.54% vs. 46.09%, p < 0.001) to the open surgery group. The laparoscopic group had reduced blood loss (p = 0.016), shorter hospital stays (p < 0.001), faster recovery of bowel function (p < 0.001), and fewer major complications (13.91% vs. 23.08%, p = 0.003). Recurrence rates were similar between groups during a median follow-up of 36 months. Hepatic lobe atrophy and biliary strictures were identified as independent risk factors for reduced stone clearance.
conclusionLaparoscopic repeat hepatectomy offers comparable stone clearance rates to open surgery while providing significant advantages in perioperative outcomes, including reduced complications and faster recovery. These findings suggest laparoscopic surgery is a feasible and effective option for recurrent regional hepatolithiasis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40087182What 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.