| Title |
Laparoscopic Versus Open Approach for Formal Right and Left Hepatectomy: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-018-4524-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesca Tozzi, Giammauro Berardi, Maaike Vierstraete, Meidai Kasai, Luis Abreu de Carvalho, Marco Vivarelli, Roberto Montalti, Roberto Ivan Troisi |
| Abstract |
Laparoscopic liver surgery is expanding worldwide, but further evidence is needed to assess safety and efficacy of laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The study analyzes perioperative outcomes of pure laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomies matched by the propensity score method. From 2005 to 2017, 268 major hepatectomies were performed of which 73 were laparoscopic. After a 1:1 propensity score matching, 59 laparoscopic right and left hepatectomies were compared to 59 open. The matching was based on age, gender, year of procedure, BMI, ASA score, underlying liver disease, previous abdominal surgery, type of hepatectomy, preoperative chemotherapy, number, dimension and nature of lesions. An intention-to-treat analysis and a per-protocol analysis were carried out. Mean surgical time was 315 min in the laparoscopic group and 292.5 min in the open group (p = 0.039); conversion rate in laparoscopy was 20.3%; blood loss was 480 ml (50-3000) versus 550 ml (50-2600), respectively, for laparoscopic and open (p = 0.577). Lengths of postoperative analgesia and hospital stay were shorter in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.0001 and 0.024, respectively). Postoperative complications occurred in 11.9% of laparoscopic cases and in 25.4% of open cases (p = 0.098). Median Comprehensive Complication Index was 26.2 (8.7-54.2) in the open group versus 20.9 (8.7-66.2) in open (p = 0.368). Per-protocol analysis showed a better trend in favor of laparoscopy concerning surgical time. Laparoscopic major hepatectomies are safe and feasible procedures allowing a similar complication rate with a shorter hospital stay and diminished postoperative pain with respect to the standard approach. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 5 | 24% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 48% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 February 2018.
All research outputs
#17,929,042
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,378
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#308,282
of 437,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#85
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 437,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.