↓ Skip to main content

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection with associated lymphadenectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score-based case-matched analysis from a single institution

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic liver resection with associated lymphadenectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a propensity score-based case-matched analysis from a single institution
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00464-015-4430-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesca Ratti, Federica Cipriani, Riccardo Ariotti, Annalisa Gagliano, Michele Paganelli, Marco Catena, Luca Aldrighetti

Abstract

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is still a relatively uncommon indication for laparoscopic surgery because of technical challenges related to the frequent need for major hepatectomies and the necessity to perform formal regional lymphadenectomy. The aim of the present case-matched study was to compare laparoscopic and open resections for ICC. In a case-matched retrospective analysis, 20 consecutive patients who had undergone laparoscopic resection for ICC (LPS group) were compared with 60 of 83 patients who had undergone open surgery (open group) in the same institution. The groups were matched in a ratio of 1:3 using propensity scores based on covariates representing relevant patient characteristics and severity of disease. The main endpoints were short- and long-term outcomes and impact and adequacy of laparoscopic lymphadenectomy. The groups were well matched in terms of patient and disease characteristics. The laparoscopic approach resulted in less blood loss (200 vs. 350 mL, p = 0.040) despite less extensive use of the Pringle maneuver. There was no difference in perioperative morbidity and mortality rates; however, the laparoscopic approach was associated with faster functional recovery (median 3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.050). After a mean follow-up of 39 months, disease-free and overall survivals were 33 and 51 months, respectively, for the LPS and 36 and 63, respectively, for the open group (p ns). The number of harvested nodes was comparable between groups. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic resection of ICC is feasible and safe, providing short-term benefits without negatively affecting oncologic adequacy in terms of rate of R0 resections, depth of margins, and long-term overall and disease-free survivals. Laparoscopic regional lymphadenectomy is technically possible but should be the object of future focused studies.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Postgraduate 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 15 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 61%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Unknown 18 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 July 2015.
All research outputs
#20,284,384
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#5,644
of 6,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,614
of 264,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#154
of 172 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 264,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 172 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.