ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2026
Comparative analysis of survival outcomes and prognostic factors between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after surgical resection: a propensity score-matched study based on the SEER database.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to explore survival outcomes and prognostic factors between intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after surgical resection.
methodsPatients diagnosed with primary intrahepatic or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma between 2010 and 2018 who underwent cancer-directed surgery were identified from the SEER database. A 1:1 Propensity Score Matching was performed. Survival outcomes were analyzed via Kaplan-Meier curves and Log-rank tests. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models and Fine-Gray competing risk models were constructed.
resultsA total of 1,586 eligible patients were included. After matching, 478 patients (239 per group) were balanced. In the matched cohort, intrahepatic patients exhibited significantly superior Overall Survival (OS) compared to extrahepatic patients (median OS: 45 vs. 25 months; HR = 1.244, 95% CI: 1.001-1.545, P = 0.049). Conversely, a Fine-Gray competing risk analysis showed no significant difference in Cancer-Specific Survival (CSS) between the subtypes (SHR = 0.818, 95% CI: 0.641-1.043, P = 0.105). Independent risk factors for OS included advanced age, T3/T4 stage, N1/N2 stage, and tumor size ≥ 5 cm. Notably, the retrieval of 4 or more lymph nodes was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.630, 95% CI: 0.469-0.846, P = 0.002), though its association with CSS was not statistically significant in the competing risk model.
conclusionsResults from this PSM analysis suggest that intrahepatic location is associated with better OS compared to extrahepatic disease, but cancer-specific survival is similar between the subtypes after accounting for competing risks. This divergence implies that survival differences might be driven by competing risks, potentially distinct long-term surgical morbidities, rather than intrinsic biological lethality. Furthermore, adequate lymphadenectomy (≥ 4 nodes) correlated with improved overall survival and staging accuracy, highlighting its potential role as a surgical quality metric for both subtypes. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.