Whether anatomic resection (AR) achieves better outcomes than nonanatomic resection (NAR) in patients with primary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is unclear. Data were retrieved for all consecutive patients who underwent liver resection for primary ICC from January 2007 to July 2017. The prognoses of the patients without direct invasion to contiguous organs or extrahepatic metastasis who underwent AR or NAR were compared. 85 patients underwent AR, and 65 patients underwent NAR. operation time were slightly decreased in the NAR group. The risk of Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) IV in the AR group was significant higher than that in the NAR group. Cox regression analysis showed lymph node metastasis and adjuvant therapy were significant prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), respectively. After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), 29 pairs of patients were compared. The survival curves showed the NAR group had slightly improved DFS and OS than the AR group before and after matching. Thus, we conclude NAR was not inferior to AR in improving the survival outcomes for patients with primary solitary ICC lesions without direct invasion to contiguous organs or extrahepatic metastasis. Furthermore, patients may benefit from NAR.
The outcomes following anterior approach (AA) hepatectomy in huge hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with diaphragmatic invasion (DI) remain unclear. This study compared the outcomes of single huge right HCC patients with and without DI after AA hepatectomy. A total of 203 consecutive patients with single huge right lobe HCC who underwent AA major hepatectomy were included. They were divided into group PDI (n = 53) and group ADI (n = 150) according to the presence or the absence of DI. Their short- and long-term outcomes were compared, and a subgroup analysis was performed. There were no significant differences regarding postoperative complications and 90-day mortality between the 2 groups. The overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were similar between the 2 groups. The subgroup analysis also showed that patients with tumor resection en bloc with part of the diaphragm had similar OS and RFS rates as those who underwent diaphragmatic resection after hepatectomy. Tumor diameter ≥ 15 cm, serum AFP level ≥ 400 ng/mL, and tumor grade of G4 and microvascular invasion are independent predictors of poor prognosis. For the single huge right lobe HCC patients with DI, AA major hepatectomy combined with diaphragmatic resection could offer similar OS and RFS as those without diaphragmatic invasion.
Background The indocyanine green (ICG) clearance test is the main method of evaluating the liver reserve function before hepatectomy. However, some patients may be allergic to ICG or the equipment of ICG clearance test was lack, leading to be difficult to evaluate liver reserve function. We aim to find an alternative tool to assist the clinicians to evaluate the liver reserve function for those who were allergic to the ICG or lack of equipment before hepatectomy. Methods We retrospected 300 patients to investigate the risk factors affecting the liver reserve function and to build an equivalent formula to predict ICG 15 min retention rate (ICG-R15) value. Results We found that the independent risk factors affecting ICG clearance test were total bilirubin, albumin, and spleen-to-non-neoplastic liver volume ratio (SNLR). The equivalent formula of the serological index combining with SNLR was: ICG-R15 = 0.36 × TB (umol/L) − 0.78 × ALB(g/L) + 7.783 × SNLR + 0.794 × PT (s) − 0.016 × PLT(/109) − 0.039 × ALT (IU/L) + 0.043 × AST (IU/L) + 23.846. The equivalent formula of serum index was: ICG-R152 = 24.665 + 0.382 × TB (umol/L) − 0.799 × ALB(g/L) − 0.025 × PLT(/109) + 0.048 × AST(IU/L) − 0.045 × ALT(IU/L). And the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of predicting ICG-R15 ≥ 10% was 0.861 and 0.857, respectively. Conclusion We found that SNLR was an independent risk factor affecting liver reserve function. Combining with SNLR to evaluate the liver reserve function was better than just basing on serology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.