ArticleJournal of hepatocellular carcinoma2026
Anatomical versus Parenchymal-Sparing Hepatectomy for Early-Stage Perihilar Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.
Article in Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The benefit of anatomical hepatectomy (AR) for patients with early-stage perihilar hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between AR and parenchymal-sparing hepatectomy (PSH) for early-stage perihilar HCC. Methods: A total of 201 patients with perihilar HCC who underwent hepatectomy between January 2015 and December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 114 patients received AR and 87 patients received PSH. Propensity score matching (PSM) with a 1:1 ratio was used to eliminate selection bias. The survival outcomes and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. Results: After PSM, 77 patients were included in each group. The proportion of patients with surgical margins ≥1 cm was higher in the AR group (31.2% vs 11.7%, P=0.003), and the incidence of postoperative liver failure was also higher in the AR group than in the PSH group (14.3% vs 3.9%, P=0.025). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were 94.6%, 80.4%, and 75.2% in the AR group and 97.4%, 78.5%, and 66.6% in the PSH group (P=0.292). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were 76.5%, 59.2% and 50.5% in the AR group and 76.5%, 48.2% and 46.2% in the PSH group, respectively (P=0.415). OS and RFS rates were similar in both groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that AFP ≥400 ng/mL (P<0.001), serum albumin level (P=0.024), tumor diameter (P=0.012), satellite nodules (P=0.006) and overall postoperative complications (P=0.005) were independent risk factors for OS. Viral hepatitis (P=0.012), AFP ≥400 ng/mL (P=0.002), satellite nodes (P=0.031) and postoperative adjuvant therapy (P=0.028) were independent risk factors for RFS. Conclusion: PSH provides similar short-term and long-term survival outcomes to AR for early-stage perihilar HCC patients. It may represent a safe and feasible treatment option for them.
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.