ArticleBJS open2025
Nationwide implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery: population-based analysis.
Article in BJS open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies of minimally invasive liver surgery described results and experiences in high-volume centres and early adopters, but data on national levels are lacking. This study evaluated the implementation and outcomes of minimally invasive liver surgery in Sweden over a 15-year period, with a focus on colorectal liver metastases.
methodsData from patients undergoing liver surgery between 2009 and 2023 were obtained from the Swedish National Quality Registry for Liver, Gallbladder and Bile Duct Cancer, and evaluated in time intervals. Propensity score matching analysis was used to compare outcomes between open and minimally invasive liver surgery for colorectal liver metastases.
resultsA total of 9977 procedures were included in the study, of which 1490 (14.9%) were minimally invasive. Minimally invasive liver surgery was used increasingly over time, and had better short-term outcomes than open liver operations, including less blood loss (median 200 (interquartile range 50-400) versus 500 (250-1000) ml; P < 0.001), fewer major complications (127 (9.3%) versus 1697 (21.9%); P < 0.001), and a lower 30-day mortality rate (6 patients (0.4%) versus 107 (1.3%); P = 0.004). Use of robotically assisted liver surgery increased over time and it constituted 311 minimally invasive liver procedures (38.4%) in the late time period. Propensity score matching analysis for patients with colorectal liver metastases showed reduced blood loss with minimally invasive liver surgery (P < 0.001), a similar rate of radical resections, and similar overall survival.
conclusionThe study demonstrated safe nationwide implementation of minimally invasive liver surgery. Use of the minimally invasive approach increased over time, including a rapid rise for robotically assisted procedures in the later period. Minimally invasive liver surgery maintained or improved favourable short-term outcomes without adverse effects on morbidity, mortality or long-term survival after surgery for colorectal liver metastases.
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.