| Title |
Laparoscopic Parenchymal-Sparing Liver Resections Using the Intrahepatic Glissonian Approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-017-5886-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marcel Autran C. Machado, R. Surjan, T. Basseres, F. Makdissi |
| Abstract |
One of the main criticisms of laparoscopic liver resection is that it is difficult, or not possible, to perform liver-sparing resections. Our aim was to present short videos where the intrahepatic Glissonian approach was used to perform anatomical liver segmental resections, instead of a larger operation, to avoid unnecessary sacrifice of the liver parenchyma. We selected six types of anatomical liver resections to exemplify the use of the intrahepatic Glissonian approach to perform segment-oriented liver resections. These types of hepatectomies were used as an alternative to right or left hepatectomy, or as an alternative to extended liver resections. The intrahepatic Glissonian approach was feasible in all cases. The use of anatomical landmarks previously described was essential to reach and control the Glissonian pedicles. Among the liver-sparing resections, we were able to perform right anterior (S5 + S8) and posterior (S6 + S7) sectionectomies, resection of segments 2, 3, and 4, and mesohepatectomy (S4 + S5 + S8). No patient presented postoperative liver failure. Laparoscopic liver-sparing resections are feasible and may be a good alternative to hemihepatectomies or extended liver resections. The use of the intrahepatic Glissonian approach can be useful. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 22% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 17% |
| Professor | 2 | 11% |
| Researcher | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 22% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 78% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 July 2017.
All research outputs
#12,753,268
of 22,990,068 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#3,491
of 6,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,327
of 309,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#23
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,990,068 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.