↓ Skip to main content

Perioperative and Long-Term Outcome for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Impact of Major Versus Minor Hepatectomy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Perioperative and Long-Term Outcome for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Impact of Major Versus Minor Hepatectomy
Published in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11605-017-3499-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xu-Feng Zhang, Fabio Bagante, Jeffery Chakedis, Dimitrios Moris, Eliza W. Beal, Matthew Weiss, Irinel Popescu, Hugo P. Marques, Luca Aldrighetti, Shishir K. Maithel, Carlo Pulitano, Todd W. Bauer, Feng Shen, George A. Poultsides, Oliver Soubrane, Guillaume Martel, B. Groot Koerkamp, Alfredo Guglielmi, Endo Itaru, Timothy M. Pawlik

Abstract

The objective of the current study was to investigate both short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing curative-intent resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) stratified by extent of hepatic resection relative to overall final pathological margin status. One thousand twenty-three patients with ICC who underwent curative-intent resection were identified from a multi-institutional database. Demographic, clinicopathological, and operative data, as well as overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared among patients undergoing major and minor resection before and after propensity score matching. Overall, 608 (59.4%) patients underwent major hepatectomy, while 415 (40.6%) had a minor resection. Major hepatectomy was more frequently performed among patients who had large, multiple, and bilobar tumors. Roughly half of patients (n = 294, 48.4%) developed a postoperative complication following major hepatectomy versus only one fourth of patients (n = 113, 27.2%) after minor resection (p < 0.001). In the propensity model, patients who underwent major hepatectomy had an equivalent OS and RFS versus patients who had a minor hepatectomy (median OS, 38 vs. 37 months, p = 0.556; and median RFS, 20 vs. 18 months, p = 0.635). Patients undergoing major resection had comparable OS and RFS with wide surgical margin (≥10 and 5-9 mm), but improved RFS when surgical margin was narrow (1-4 mm) versus minor resection in the propensity model. In the Cox regression model, tumor characteristics and surgical margin were independently associated with long-term outcome. Major hepatectomy for ICC was not associated with an overall survival benefit, yet was associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Margin width, rather than the extent of resection, affected long-term outcomes. Radical parenchymal-sparing resection should be advocated if a margin clearance of ≥5 mm can be achieved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Professor 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 9 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Unspecified 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Unknown 11 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#8,543,833
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#763
of 2,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,373
of 327,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
#15
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,489 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
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 327,114 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 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 68% of its contemporaries.