Anterior Approach Versus Conventional Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Quan Wang,Bobo Zheng,Bin Ma,KeHu Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd010545

2021-01-01

Abstract:This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the benefits and harms of the anterior approach compared with those of conventional liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Case-Matched Studies

Ke Chen,Yu Pan,Bin Zhang,Xiao-long Liu,Hendi Maher,Xue-yong Zheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1746895

2018-01-01

Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Abstract:Objective To present a meta-analysis of high-quality case-matched studies comparing laparoscopic (LH) and open hepatectomy (OH) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods Studies published up to September 2017 comparing LH and OH for HCC were identified. Selection of high-quality, nonrandomized comparative studies (NRCTs) with case-matched design was based on a validated tool (Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies) since no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were published. Morbidity, mortality, operation time, blood loss, hospital stay, margin distance, recurrence, and survival outcomes were compared. Subgroup analyses were carried out according to the surgical extension (minor or major hepatectomy). Results Twenty studies with a total of 830 patients (388 in LH and 442 in OH) were identified. For short-term surgical outcomes, LH showed less morbidity (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.47~0.65; P < 0.01), less mortality (RR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.18~1.00; P = 0.05), less blood loss (WMD = −93.21 ml, 95% CI, −157.33~−29.09 ml; P < 0.01), shorter hospital stay (WMD = −2.86, 95% CI, −3.63~−2.08; P < 0.01), and comparable operation time (WMD = 9.15 min; 95% CI: −7.61~25.90, P = 0.28). As to oncological outcomes, 5-year overall survival rate was slightly better in LH than OH (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.52~0.84, P < 0.01), whereas the 5-year disease-free survival rate was comparable between two groups (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.74~1.06, P = 0.18). Conclusion This meta-analysis has highlighted that LH can be safely performed in selective patients and improves surgical outcomes as compared to OH. Given the limitations of study design, especially the limited cases of major hepatectomy, methodologically high-quality comparative studies are needed for further evaluation.
Perioperative Outcomes Comparing Laparoscopic with Open Repeat Liver Resection for Post-Hepatectomy Recurrent Liver Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Yuelong Liang,Chengping Lin,Bin Zhang,Jiasheng Cao,Mingyu Chen,Jieliang Shen,Feng Xu,Guang-Yuan Xiao,Ping Long,Ke Chen,Hendi Maher,Xiujun Cai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.03.052

2020-01-01

International Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Repeat laparoscopic hepatectomy (LRH) offers an option for recurrent tumors in liver remnants following an initial liver resection of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) and cholangiocellular carcinoma (CCC), showing advantages in some outcomes. The objective of the study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of LRH in comparison with repeat open hepatectomy (ORH) for recurrent liver cancer.A systematic review was performed in compliance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) and AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) guidelines. We performed a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify studies that compared LRH with ORH from inception to September 30, 2019. Outcomes of interest included operation time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication rate, transfusion and R0 resection rate. The protocol was registered with the PROSPERO register of systematic reviews.10 retrospective observational studies were suitable for this analysis, involving 767 patients with 334 undergoing LRH (43.5%) and 433 undergoing ORH (56.5%). Compared with ORH, LRH had less intraoperative blood loss (SMD = -1.03; 95% CI: 1.48~-0.59, P < 0.001), less overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.16-0.99, P = 0.048), less major complications (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15-0.62, P = 0.001), shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.98; 95% CI: 1.41~-0.54, P < 0.001) and higher R0 resection rate (OR = 2.30, 95% CI: 1.39-3.81, P = 0.001). It was comparable in operation time (WMD = -7.66; 95% CI: 52.50-37.19, P = 0.738), transfusion rate (OR = 0.33; 95% CI:0.11-1.05, P = 0.060), and mortality (OR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.27-2.18, P = 0.615) between LRH and ORH.Our results indicate that LRH is a safe and effective technique. Benefits, especially less intra-operative blood loss, less complications rate, shorter hospital stay and higher R0 resection, might be offered in the laparoscopic approach.
[A Comparative Study of Anterior Versus Conventional Approach Right Hepatectomy for Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma].

Shao-qiang Li,Li-jian Liang,Bao-gang Peng,Xiao-yu Yin,Ming-de Lü,Ming Kuang,Dong-ming Li,Shun-jun Fu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2010.24.004

2010-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To compare the outcomes between anterior versus conventional approach right hepatectomy for large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).METHODS:A total of 188 consecutive patients with large HCC ( > or =5 cm) undergoing right hepatectomy were reviewed retrospectively. Among them, 92 patients received anterior approach right hepatectomy (anterior group) while the other conventional right hepatectomy (conventional group). Their clinicopathologic data and survivals were compared.RESULTS:There were five surgical deaths (2.7%), two in the anterior group and three in the conventional group. The biochemical and tumor pathological data (except for tumor size) of these two groups were comparable. The mean intraoperative blood loss, the number of patients with massive hemorrhage ( >3000 ml) and the volume of blood transfusion of the anterior group were markedly less than those of conventional group. The 1-, 3-year disease-free survival rates of the anterior group were significantly better than those of the conventional group (56.2%, 30.9% vs. 39.1%, 13.0%, P = 0.043). The 1- & 3-year cumulative survival rates of the anterior group were also markedly higher than those of conventional group. The Cox regression model indicated that tumor size [P = 0.014, odd ratio (OD) = 1.074] and surgical procedure (P = 0.009, OD = 0. 468) were independent risk factors correlated with disease-free survival. And the surgical procedure (P = 0.003, OD = 0.369) was the only independent risk factor for postoperative cumulative survival.CONCLUSION:Anterior approach right hepatectomy can significantly decrease intraoperative blood loss. The postoperative survivals of large HCC patients are significantly improved by anterior approach right hepatectomy.
Anterior Vs Conventional Approach Hepatectomy for Large Liver Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Lei Li,Hai-Qing Wang,Qing Wang,Jian Yang,Jia-Yin Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v20.i45.17235

IF: 5.374

2014-01-01

World Journal of Gastroenterology

Abstract:AIM:To evaluate the clinical outcomes and safety of anterior- and conventional-approach hepatectomy for patients with large liver tumors.METHODS:PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials comparing anterior-approach hepatectomy (AAH) and conventional-approach hepatectomy (CAH). Two observers independently extracted the data using a spreadsheet and assessed the studies for inclusion. Studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria and addressed the clinical questions of this analysis were further assessed using either fixed effects or random effects models.RESULTS:Two RCTs and six controlled clinical trials involving 807 patients met the predefined inclusion criteria. A total of 363 patients underwent AAH and 444 underwent CAH. Meta-analysis indicated that the AAH group had fewer requirements for transfusion (OR = 0.37, 95%CI: 0.21-0.63), less recurrence (OR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.37-0.87), and lower mortality (OR = 0.29, 95%CI: 0.13-0.63). There were no significant differences between AAH and CAH with regard to perioperative complications (OR = 0.94, 95%CI: 0.58-1.51), intraoperative tumor rupture (OR = 0.98, 95%CI: 0.40-2.40), or length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference = -0.17, 95%CI: -2.36-2.02).CONCLUSION:AAH has advantages of decreased transfusion, mortality and recurrence compared to CAH. It is a safe and effective method for large cancers requiring right hepatectomy.
Hepatic Resection Versus TILA-TACE in the Treatment of Resectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Yangyang Feng,Yun Jin,Kai Jin,Yuanquan Yu,Donger Zhou,Jianjun Wu,Bin Li,Guangqiang Zhang,Shuyou Peng,Xiaogang Qi,Hao Geng,Yinghao Guo,Ming Chao,Jiangtao Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.12620/v2

2019-01-01

Abstract:Background: Hepatic resection and transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) are common treatments for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Targeting intratumoral lactic acidosis TACE (TILA-TACE) is a new therapeutic approach developed by our team that has superior response rate and effective rate than conventional TACE (cTACE). In this randomized-controlled trial, we will compare the efficacy of hepatic resection and TILA-TACE in patients clinically diagnosed with HCC to provide reliable clinical data for the subsequent effective treatment of HCC patients. Methods: A total of 230 resectable HCC patients will be given hepatic resection or TILA-TACE using a parallel-controlled approach, and the efficacy of the treatments Page 4 of 24 will be compared. The primary endpoint is the post-treatment progression-free survival (PFS) of the patients, and the secondary endpoints are the post-treatment overall survival (OS), 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival, and the quality of life of the patients at each corresponding stage. Discussion: The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of hepatic resection and TILA-TACE in the treatment of resectable HCC. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT03314532.Registered on 19 October 2017. Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma, Hepatic resection, TACE, TILA-TACE, Randomized-controlled study.
Regional Versus Extended Lymph Node Dissection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: a Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol

Li Qi,Feng Yangyang,Jin Yun,Xi Longfu,Yu Yuanquan,Guo Yinghao,Zhang Xiaoxiao,Wu Di,Li Jiangtao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.10.07.22280815

2022-01-01

Abstract:ABSTRACTIntroductionThe mainstay treatment for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is surgical resection, the impact of lymph node dissection and the scope of lymph node dissection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery is controversial. However, research on the comparative of regional lymphadenectomy and extended lymphadenectomy is still limited. This study will explore the effect of regional lymphadenectomy and extended lymphadenectomy in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery patients to provide reliable evidence for further standardize the scope of lymph node dissection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery.Methods and analysisThis is a prospective, multicentre, randomised controlled trial in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery patients. A total of 174 patients will be enrolled at the first clinic visit in sites from China. Participants will be allocated randomly to the regional lymphadenectomy group and extended lymphadenectomy group (1:1 ratio). Patients in different groups undergo the corresponding surgery. Primary study outcome is disease-free survival (DFS). Secondary study outcomes include incidence of severe Clavien–Dindo complications (≥II), safety of operation, overall survival (OS), three-year survival rate, five-year survival rate and median mortality. Participants will be followed up at baseline, post-operation, every 3 months for the first 2 years and 6 months for the next 3 years to evaluate the impact of different surgery types. The analysis will be done according to protocol cohorts, adjusted by variables associated with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the ethical review committee of the second affiliated hospital Zhejiang University school of medicine (2019-261) and will provide reference for standardize the scope of lymph node dissection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov,NCT04078230. Registered on September 6, 2019. The study is expected to last for more than five years, and the first patient was enrolled on August 22, 2020, and a total of 17 patients have been enrolled so far.
Total Laparoscopic Right Hemihepatectomy Through Anterior Approach for Larger Tumors in the Right Lobe of the Liver

Jie Liu,Cheng-Wu Zhang,Defei Hong,Zhiming Hu,Yuhua Zhang,Weiding Wu,Minjie Shang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-631x.2017.07.011

2017-01-01

Abstract:Objective To explore the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy (LRH) via anterior approach for larger tumors in the right lobe of the liver. Methods A retrospective study was conducted based on the clinical data of ten consecutive patients with large right liver cancer undergoing LRH through anterior approach and thirty-seven patients undergoing open hemihepatectomy by anterior approach in recent 6 years. Results Between the two groups there were no significant difference in gender, average age, the mean tumor size, preoperative liver reserve function, cut margin and intraoperative blood transfusion. The LRH group had less average intraoperative blood loss [(408±158)ml vs.(520±153)ml, t=2.047, P=0.046] and shorter postoperative hospital stay [(11.5±2.8)d vs.(16.2±4.6)d, t=3.091, P=0.003], longer operation time [(302±38)min vs.(251±55)min, t=2.732, P=0.009]. There was no perioperative death and no significant difference in complications (20.0% vs.35.1%, χ2=0.812, P=0.367) and similar median survival time (36 mon vs.29 mon, χ2=1.266, P=0.261). Conclusions LRH via anterior approach for larger tumors in the right lobe of the liver is safe and feasible. Key words: Liver neoplasms; Laparoscopes; Hepatectomy
Postoperative adjuvant transarterial (chemo)embolisation after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

qi zhang,x l bai,wei chen,tao ma,hao liu,yun zhang,x j hu,t b liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010897

IF: 8.4

2013-01-01

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate systematically the available literature of randomised clinical trials regarding the benefits and harms of transarterial (chemo)embolisation as a postoperative adjuvant treatment in people who have undergone hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Anterior approach with or without liver hanging maneuver versus conventional approach in major liver resections. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Stefano Granieri,Simone Frassini,Beatrice Torre,Alessandro Bonomi,Sissi Paleino,Federica Bruno,Andrea Chierici,Elson Gjoni,Alessandro Germini,Fabrizio Romano,Mattia Garancini,Mauro Alessandro Scotti,Christian Cotsoglou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2024.108535

2024-07-06

Abstract:Introduction: The anterior approach (AA), whether or not associated with the liver hanging maneuver (LHM), has been advocated to improve survival and postoperative outcomes in HCC patients undergoing major liver resection. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aims to explore intra/perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of AA ± LHM compared to CA regardless of tumor histology. Methods: The study was conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations searching the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases until January 27, 2024 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42024507060). Only English-language RCTs were included. The primary outcome, expressed as hazard ratio (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI), was the overall and disease-free survival. Random effects models were developed to assess heterogeneity. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed with the RoB 2 tool. The certainty of evidence was assessed following GRADE recommendations. Results: Six RCTs, for a total of 736 patients were included. A significant survival benefit was highlighted for patients undergoing AA ± LHM in terms of overall (HR: 0.65; 95 % CI: 0.62-0.68; p < 0.0001) and disease-free survival (HR: 0.65; 95 % CI: 0.63-0.68; p < 0.0001). AA ± LHM was associated with a longer duration of surgery (WMD: 29.5 min; 95 % CI: 17.72-41.27; p = 0.004), and a lower intraoperative blood loss (WMD: 24.3; 95 % CI: 31.1 to -17.5; p = 0.0014). No difference was detected for other postoperative outcomes. The risk of bias was low. Conclusion: AA ± LHM provides better survival outcomes compared to CA. Furthermore, AA ± LHM is related to a modest reduction in intraoperative blood loss, at the price of a slightly longer duration of hepatectomy. Regarding other postoperative outcomes, the two techniques appear comparable.
Right Hepatic Resection for Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using the Anterior Approach Versus the Conventional Approach: a Meta-analysis

DONG Jian,ZHU Ying,ZHENG Xing-long,LONG Zhi-da,LI Mu-xing,L(U) Yi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-8118.2013.09.003

2013-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the results of the anterior approach (AA) with the conventional approach in the treatment of large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Methods We searched the Medline,PubMed,Cochrane Library,Wanfang database on randomized clinical controlled trials and non-randomized clinical controlled trials comparing AA with the CA in right hepatic resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma.The data were analyzed with the RevMan5 software.Results Five non-randomized clinical controlled trials (NRCTs) and three randomized clinical controlled trials involving 615 patients (304 in the AA group,311 in the CA group) were enrolled into the analysis.There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups.Compared with the CA,the AA had lower intraoperative blood loss (WMD=-680.2 ml; 95％CI,-1023.97～-336.43;P=0.0001),blood transfusion rate (OR=0.38;95％ CI,0.25～0.59;P＜0.0001),intraoperative tumor rupture (OR=0.33;95％CI,0.11～0.97;P=0.04),surgical complication (OR=0.59;95％CI,0.38 ～ 0.93 ; P =0.02),hospital mortality (OR =0.37 ; 95 ％ CI,0.21 ～ 0.67 ; P =0.0009),and hospital stay (WMD=-4.75 d;95％CI,-7.82～-1.67;P=0.002).Conclusion AA is superior to CA in the treatment of larger.The operation time is the same for the 2 approaches.
Anatomic Versus Non-Anatomic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Systematic Review.

Yun-Hao Tang,Tian-Fu Wen,Xi Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5754/hge.11235

2014-01-01

Abstract:Background/Aims: To evaluate the feasibility and therapeutic effects of anatomic liver resection versus non-anatomic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Methodology: Randomized controlled trials and non-randomized trials comparing the clinical effectiveness between anatomic and-non-anatomic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma were identified by using a predefined search strategy A meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled survival and recurrence rate. Results: No Randomized controlled trial was identified. Twelve non-randomized comparative trials (10 in English and 2 in Chinese) including total 1,829 cases, 1,065 cases in anatomic resection group and 824 cases in non-anatomic resection group, were included in this review. Meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference between anatomic and non-anatomic liver resection in 1-year survival rate (p = 0.98), 3-year survival rate (p = 0.75), 5-year survival rate (p = 0.38) and recurrence rate (p = 0.44). The differences in post-operative morbidity (p = 0.32) and blood loss during operation (p = 0.11) were also not statistically significant. Conclusions: Anatomic liver resection for HCC does not provide significant benefit in 1-year/3-year/5-year survival rate, recurrence rate, post-operative morbidity and blood loss during operation compared With non-anatomic resection.
Meta-analysis of anatomic resection versus nonanatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Yanming Zhou,Donghui Xu,Lupeng Wu,Bin Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-011-0784-9

2011-01-01

Abstract:Purpose The choice between anatomic resection (AR) versus nonanatomic resection (NAR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial. This study is a meta-analysis of the available evidence. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials comparing AR with NAR for HCC published from 1985 to 2009 in PubMed and Medline database, Cochrane database, Embase database, and Science Citation index were conducted. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rate were considered as primary outcomes. Pooled effect was calculated using either the fixed effects model or random effects model. Results Sixteen nonrandomized studies involving 2,917 patients were analyzed; 1,577 patients were in the AR group, and 1,340 were in the NAR group. Patients in the AR group were characterized by lower prevalence of cirrhosis and hepatitis virus infection, more favorable hepatic function, and larger tumor size compared with patients in the NAR group. AR provided a better 5-year overall survival than NAR (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.15–2.32). Local recurrence (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.16–0.50) and early (≤2 years) recurrence (OR, 0.55; 95 CI, 0.34–0.89) were all significantly lower in the AR group. AR improved disease-free survival significantly at 3 years (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.52–2.88) and 5 years (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.85–2.72). No differences were found between the two groups with respect to postoperative morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay. Conclusions AR was superior to NAR in terms of better survival and preventing local recurrence for the treatment of HCC.
Efficacy and Safety of Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Yifei Tan,Wei Zhang,Li Jiang,Jiayin Yang,Lunan Yan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186930

IF: 3.7

2017-01-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:The surgical decision of performing anatomic resection (AR) or nonanatomic resection (NAR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma remains controversial. The aim of the current study is to conduct a meta-analysis on published results to compare surgical outcomes after AR and NAR.A comprehensive search of the Pubmed, Ovid-Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and Science Citation indexes was performed. Overall and disease free survival (DFS), perioperative mortality and morbidity were the main outcomes. The meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 statistical software, and the results are expressed as the relative risk (RR) or weighted mean differences with 95% of confidence intervals.After application of the exclusion and inclusion criteria, 25 studies published between 1996~2015 that compared outcomes after AR and NAR in patients with HCC were identified. A total of 10216 patients were included in the meta-analysis, 4576 in the AR group and 5640 in the NAR group. Liver cirrhosis was found in 54.8% (range from 18.8% to 100%) of patients in the AR group and 67.8% (range from 34.3% to 100%) of patients in the NAR group, resulting in a RR of 0.45 (I2 = 18%, fixed model, 95% CI 0.39-0.52; Z = 10.31; P = <0.00001). The meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant 5-year survival (RR of 1.10, 95% CI 1.03-1.17; Z = 2.92, P = 0.004) and DFS (RR: 1.33, 95% CI 1.18-1.51; Z = 4.46, P <0.00001) advantage for patients undergoing AR resection compared to NAR. In regards to safety, no statistical significance was found in mortality and morbidity between the two groups. Eight studies including 1812 patients with small (<5 cm) solitary HCC indicated a better 5-year DFS in the AR group (41.4%) than in the NAR group (28.6%), with a RR of 1.32 (I2 = 42, fixed model, 95%CI: 1.15-1.52, Z = 3.86, P = 0.0001).The current study demonstrates better surgical outcomes after AR than NAR in patients with HCC. Therefore, AR is recommended in resectable HCC, especially with small (<5 cm) solitary tumours.
Comparative study on left-sided versus right-sided hepatectomy for resectable peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Bowen Xu,Wei Zhao,Jianhua Chang,Jinghua Yin,Nan Wang,Zhaoru Dong,Xuting Zhi,Tao Li,Zhiqiang Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03037-2

2023-05-18

Abstract:Background: Peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) is a unique entity, and radical surgery provides the only chance for cure and long-term survival. But it is still under debate which surgical strategy (i.e., left-sided hepatectomy, LH or right-sided hepatectomy, RH) should be followed and benefitted. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze the clinical outcomes and prognostic value of LH versus RH for resectable pCCA. This study followed the PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines. Results: A total of 14 cohort studies include 1072 patients in the meta-analysis. The results showed no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). But compared to the LH group, the RH group exhibited more employment of preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE), higher rate of overall complications, post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF), and perioperative mortality, while LH was associated with higher frequency of arterial resection/reconstruction, longer operative time, and more postoperative bile leakage. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of preoperative biliary drainage, R0 resection rate, portal vein resection, intraoperative bleeding, and intraoperative blood transfusion rate. Conclusions: According to our meta-analyses, LH and RH have comparable oncological effects on curative resection for pCCA patients. Although LH is not inferior to RH in DFS and OS, it requires more arterial reconstruction which is technically demanding and should be performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume centers. Selectin of surgical strategy between LH and RH should be based on not only tumor location (Bismuth classification) but also vascular involvement and future liver remnant (FLR).
Survival after Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Jinggui Chen,Kai Huang,Jianghong Wu,Huiyan Zhu,Yingqiang Shi,Yanong Wang,Guangfa Zhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-010-1482-0

2010-01-01

Digestive Diseases and Sciences

Abstract:Background and Objectives To compare the effect on survival of anatomic resection (AR) versus nonanatomic resection (NAR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from all published comparative studies in the literature. Methods Databases, including Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science, were searched to identify studies comparing AR with NAR for HCC. In this meta-analysis, primary end points were the overall survival and disease-free survival; the secondary end point was local recurrence rate. The meta-analysis was performed by use of RevMan 4.2. Results Nine comparative studies comprising 1,503 patients (833 AR and 670 NAR) were identified. In the combined results, disease-free survival was significantly higher in the AR group than in the NAR group (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.22–2.59, P = 0.003; heterogeneity P = 0.08). Overall survival (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.92–1.85, P = 0.13; heterogeneity P = 0.04) did not suggest any significant difference between AR and NAR. No statistically significant difference was found for local recurrence rate between the two resection methods (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.25–1.23, P = 0.15; heterogeneity P = 0.010). Conclusions Anatomic resection is associated with better disease-free survival than nonanatomic resection. Because heterogeneity was detected, caution is needed in interpretation of the results. Better designed, adequately powered studies are required to address this issue.
Anterior Versus Posterior Approach for Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Zhen-kai Wu,Qing-hua Zhao,Ji-wei Tian,Yong-bing Qian,Yi Zhou,Fan Yang,Li Zhao,Daniel E Porter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd012365

2016-01-01

Abstract:This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: The primary objective of this review is to assess the effectiveness of anterior versus posterior surgical approaches in patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM), with a focus on pain intensity, quality of life, neurological outcomes, and harms/complications.
Hepatic Re-resection Versus Transarterial Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Initial Resection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Diya Wang,Lei Liu,Xingshun Qi,Chunping Su,Xue Chen,Xu Liu,Jiang Chen,Hongyu Li,Xiaozhong Guo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.13.5573

2015-01-01

Abstract:Hepatic re-resection might provide a better post-recurrence survival than TACE for recurrent HCC after initial resection. However, considering the low quality of published studies and the potential bias of treatment selection, further randomized trials should be warranted to confirm these findings.
Perioperative and long-term outcomes of liver resection for hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma without versus with hepatic inflow occlusion: study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial

Yinzhe Xu,Jiye Chen,Hongguang Wang,Hui Zheng,Dan Feng,Aiqun Zhang,Jianjun Leng,Weidong Duan,Zhanyu Yang,Mingyi Chen,Xianjie Shi,Shouwang Cai,Wenbin Ji,Kai Jiang,Wenzhi Zhang,Yongliang Chen,Wanqing Gu,Jiahong Dong,Shichun Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1621-9

IF: 2.728

2016-10-11

Trials

Abstract:Background: The high prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) imposes a huge burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Asia. Surgical resection remains an important therapeutic strategy for HCC. Hepatic inflow occlusion, known as the Pringle maneuver, is the most commonly used method of reducing blood loss during liver parenchymal transection. A major issue with this maneuver is ischemia-reperfusion injury to the remnant liver, and the hemodynamic disturbance it induces in the tumor-bearing liver raises an oncological concern. Given the technical advances in living donor liver transplantation, vascular occlusion in liver resection can be avoided in experienced hands. The aim of this study is to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of liver resection for HBV-related HCC without versus with hepatic inflow occlusion. Methods/design: This study will include eligible patients with HBV-related HCC elected for liver resection. Fifty-seven patients will be enrolled in each randomization arm to detect a 20 % difference in the serum level of total bilirubin on postoperative day 5 (80 % power and α = 0.05). The secondary endpoints include procedural parameters, perioperative liver function and inflammatory response, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and long-term outcomes. Patients will be followed for up to 5 years. Data will be statistically analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Discussion: This prospective randomized controlled trial is designed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of liver resection for HBV-related HCC without versus with vascular occlusion. The clinical implications of these outcomes may change current surgical practice and fill the oncological gaps therein. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02563158 . Registered on 28 September 2015.
Radiofrequency-assisted Anterior Approach Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Bao-gang Peng,Shun-li Shen,Ming Kuang,Li-jian Liang,Shao-qiang Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2012.06.006

2012-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To investigate the safety and efficacy of radiofrequency-assisted anterior approach right hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).METHODS:The clinic data of 12 HCC patients who underwent radiofrequency-assisted anterior approach right hepatectomy from January 2010 to July 2011 was analyzed retrospectively. Surgical techniques and treatment response were retrospectively reviewed. All the 12 patients were male, aging from 38 to 57 years with a mean of (48 ± 6) years. Ten of the 12 patients were infected with hepatitis B virus. A retrohepatic tunnel anterior to the surface of the inferior vena cava (IVC) was developed. The liver was hanged away from the IVC and radiofrequency was carried out along the Cantline's line. Scalpel was used to cut off the liver parenchyma along the middle of the ablated area until the parenchyma was fully resected. After short hepatic veins and the right hepatic vein were ligated, ligaments of right liver were fully isolated and right liver was resected. The t test was performed between 2 groups.RESULTS:The surgical time was 165 to 295 minutes, with a mean of (230 ± 55) minutes. The bleeding was 150 to 1500 ml, with a mean of (516 ± 378) ml, which was better than those of anterior approach right hepatectomy ((1291 ± 1159) ml) and classical right hepatectomy ((2129 ± 2012) ml; t = 1.236, 3.265; P < 0.05). The postoperative hospital stay was 8 - 19 days, with a mean of (12 ± 4) days. There were no medical complications and no postoperative death. All patients were cured and discharged.CONCLUSIONS:Radiofrequency-assisted anterior approach right hepatectomy for HCC is safe and effective and could effectively decrease intra-operative bleeding and shorten surgical time.
Anterior Approach for Complete Resection of Liver Caudate Lobe

吴志全,樊嘉,周俭,邱双键,黄晓武,孙健,肖永胜,汤钊猷

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-8118.2002.03.008

2002-01-01

Abstract:Objective To seek a safe procedure for complete resection of liver caudate lobe because of tumor in it. Methods Complete liver caudate lobectomy was performed in 14 patients from March 1997 to September 2000. The anterior approach combined with retrograde hepatectomy and vascular surgical technique were adopted in 9 patients (group A) and the conventional complete caudate lobectomy was done in the other 5 (group B). The differences in the operative duration, estimated perioperative blood loss, incidence of postoperative complications and follow-up results were compared between the 2 groups. Results The operative duration was significantly shorter (P0.05), estimated blood loss lower (P0.01), complication incidence lower (P0.05), time for liver functional recovery shorter (P0.01) and follow-up results better in group A than in group B. Conclusions Anterior approach combined with retrograde hepatectomy and vascular technique is a safe procedure for complete liver caudate lobectomy and suitable for resection of liver caudate lobe bearing tumors.

Anterior Approach Versus Conventional Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Case-Matched Studies

Perioperative Outcomes Comparing Laparoscopic with Open Repeat Liver Resection for Post-Hepatectomy Recurrent Liver Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

[A Comparative Study of Anterior Versus Conventional Approach Right Hepatectomy for Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma].

Anterior Vs Conventional Approach Hepatectomy for Large Liver Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Hepatic Resection Versus TILA-TACE in the Treatment of Resectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Regional Versus Extended Lymph Node Dissection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: a Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol

Total Laparoscopic Right Hemihepatectomy Through Anterior Approach for Larger Tumors in the Right Lobe of the Liver

Postoperative adjuvant transarterial (chemo)embolisation after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Anterior approach with or without liver hanging maneuver versus conventional approach in major liver resections. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Right Hepatic Resection for Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using the Anterior Approach Versus the Conventional Approach: a Meta-analysis

Anatomic Versus Non-Anatomic Liver Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: a Systematic Review.

Meta-analysis of anatomic resection versus nonanatomic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma

Efficacy and Safety of Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparative study on left-sided versus right-sided hepatectomy for resectable peri-hilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Survival after Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis

Anterior Versus Posterior Approach for Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Hepatic Re-resection Versus Transarterial Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Initial Resection: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Perioperative and long-term outcomes of liver resection for hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma without versus with hepatic inflow occlusion: study protocol for a prospective randomized controlled trial

Radiofrequency-assisted Anterior Approach Right Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Anterior Approach for Complete Resection of Liver Caudate Lobe