ArticleCancers2026
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Liver Resection: A Prospective Single-Center Analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Predictors of Recovery.
Article in Cancers, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional outcome assessment after liver surgery mainly relies on perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, these parameters fail to capture the multidimensional recovery experienced by patients after hepatic resection. This study aimed to evaluate changes in quality of life (QoL) between the preoperative and three-month postoperative assessments using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and to identify factors associated with impaired postoperative recovery.
methodsA prospective observational study was conducted including 71 consecutive patients undergoing liver resection at a tertiary hepatobiliary referral center between May 2024 and May 2025. QoL was assessed preoperatively and three months after surgery using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LMC21 questionnaires. PROMs were correlated with demographic, clinical, operative, and postoperative variables. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with worse postoperative QoL.
resultsSignificant improvements in postoperative QoL were observed at three months compared with baseline in both the QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LMC21 questionnaires (both
conclusionsLiver resection was associated with improvement in patient-reported QoL three months after surgery. PROMs provide clinically relevant information beyond conventional surgical metrics and may help identify patients requiring tailored perioperative support. The integration of PROMs into liver surgery pathways may contribute to the development of a more patient-centered model of surgical care.
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.