Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2026
Laparoscopic extrahepatic Glissonian versus hilar dissection approach for major hepatectomy in patients with HCC: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuring laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), an appropriate approach for hepatic hilum treatment is crucial. However, to date, there is still controversy about whether the Glissonian approach or hilar dissection approach is more advantageous for hepatic hilum treatment. Thus, we performed this randomized controlled trial to compare the short- and long-term outcomes between the Glissonian and hilar dissection approaches for LMH.
methodsBetween November 2017 and July 2021, 256 HCC patients who initially met the criteria via preoperative evaluation were randomly assigned to this trial. After surgical exploration, 119 patients in the Glissonian group and 121 patients in the hilar dissection group were eventually enrolled in the modified intention-to treat (ITT) principled analysis. Perioperative data and survival outcomes between both groups were recorded and compared, and subgroup analysis was further performed.
resultsThe 5-year OS rates and 5-year DFS rates were comparable between the two groups. In addition, postoperative overall complications, including bile duct injury, leakage, and stricture, did not differ between the groups. However, the operative time (P = 0.044) and the hilar dissection time (P < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the Glissonian group than the hilar dissection group. Additionally, for patients with liver cirrhosis, the Glissonian group had shorter operative time (P = 0.002) and less intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.004) than the hilar dissection group.
conclusionsThe Glissonian approach for LMH in selected HCC patients is superior to the hilar dissection approach in short-term outcomes, but the survival outcomes were comparable between both groups. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR-IOR-17013077.
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.