SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2026
Conversion hepatectomy and survival in initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis with quantitative bias analysis.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConversion hepatectomy has become feasible for selected patients with initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), with comparative studies reporting longer survival after surgery. We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and quantitative bias analysis (QBA) to assess whether residual selection and time-dependent treatment bias could account for the reported benefit.
methodsWe systematically reviewed comparative studies of conversion or salvage hepatectomy versus non-surgical management in initially unresectable HCC and pooled endpoint-specific HRs for OS and PFS/EFS using random-effects models. For each estimate, we extracted the time origin, exposure definition, and adjustment model. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using ROBINS-I and GRADE. Robustness to unmeasured confounding, immortal time bias, and small-study effects was evaluated using E-values, tipping-point analysis, probabilistic QBA, timing-bias scenario analyses, and funnel-plot diagnostics.
resultsFourteen studies contributed 24 h: 14 for OS and 10 for PFS/EFS. Hepatectomy was associated with lower hazards of death (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.22-0.48) and progression or event (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28-0.59), although heterogeneity was substantial and both prediction intervals crossed 1.0. E-values suggested robustness to moderate unmeasured confounding, whereas extreme surgical-candidacy confounding attenuated the median bias-adjusted HR to 0.82 for OS and 1.02 for PFS/EFS. Immortal-time bias scenarios did not fully account for the observed associations. OS small-study-effect diagnostics suggested funnel-plot asymmetry, although sample-size-based Peters-type regression was not significant. Certainty of evidence was very low for both endpoints.
conclusionsConversion hepatectomy was associated with better observed survival outcomes in selected patients with initially unresectable HCC after conversion-intent therapy. The association was robust to moderate, but not extreme, assumptions about unmeasured surgical-candidacy confounding. These findings should be interpreted as a composite post-conversion association reflecting surgical clearance, treatment response, favorable tumor biology, and patient selection rather than as the isolated causal effect of hepatectomy. Future studies should report surgical eligibility landmarks, time zero, time to hepatectomy, and reasons for non-resection to clarify the independent contribution of surgery within conversion pathways.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD420261382843 ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=1382843 ).
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.