ArticleScientific reports2025
Stereotactic body radiotherapy versus laparoscopic liver resection for single hepatocellular carcinoma ≤ 5 cm: a retrospective, multicenter, cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To compare the efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for patients with single hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) ≤ 5 cm. A retrospective analysis was conducted on a cohort of patients with HCC who underwent either LLR or SBRT at our centers. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups using the log-rank test. To reduce selection bias, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied. Subgroup analyses were also performed to explore outcomes across different clinical and tumor-related characteristics. This retrospective cohort study included 383 patients from four hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019, with 268 patients in the LLR group and 115 in the SBRT group. After PSM adjustment, 98 patients were selected from each group for further analysis. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 94.9%, 88.8%, and 85.7% in the LLR group and 94.9%, 74.5%, and 67.3% in the SBRT group, respectively (p = 0.005). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year RFS rates were 86.7%, 71.4%, and 70.4% in the LLR group and 83.7%, 61.2%, and 53.1% in the SBRT group, respectively (p = 0.011). LLR provided better OS and RFS than SBRT. However, SBRT showed comparable OS and RFS outcomes with LLR for tumors ≤ 3 cm (p = 0.158; p = 0.418), and perivascular tumors (p = 0.082; p = 0.166). LLR is the first choice for treating single HCC ≤ 5 cm, while SBRT may be a favorable alternative for small and perivascular lesions.
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.