↓ Skip to main content

Multimodal radiofrequency ablation versus laparoscopic hepatic resection for the treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria in severely cirrhotic patients: long-term…

Overview of attention for article published in Surgical Endoscopy, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Multimodal radiofrequency ablation versus laparoscopic hepatic resection for the treatment of primary hepatocellular carcinoma within Milan criteria in severely cirrhotic patients: long-term favorable outcomes over 10 years
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00464-018-6264-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yo-ichi Yamashita, Katsunori Imai, Takayoshi Kaida, Takanobu Yamao, Masayo Tsukamoto, Shigeki Nakagawa, Hirohisa Okabe, Akira Chikamoto, Takatoshi Ishiko, Tomoharu Yoshizumi, Tetsuo Ikeda, Yoshihiko Maehara, Hideo Baba

Abstract

Less invasiveness is an important consideration for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) especially in patients with severe cirrhosis. Between April 2000 and September 2016, 100 patients with liver damage B underwent multimodal radiofrequency ablation (RFA; n = 62) or laparoscopic hepatic resection (Lap-HR; n = 38) for primary HCC as defined by the Milan criteria. We compared the operative outcomes and patients' survival between the two groups. The RFA group showed worse liver functions as indicated by indocyanine green retention rate (32.9 vs. 22.4%; p < 0.0001) and serum albumin value (3.3 vs. 3.6 g/dl; p = 0.0029). As expected, RFA was less invasive, as indicated by the differences in operation time (166 vs. 288 min.; p < 0.0001) and blood loss (8 vs. 377 g; p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the morbidity rate between the two groups; however, the duration of hospital stay of the RFA group was significantly shorter (7 vs. 11 days; p = 0.0002). There were no significant between-group differences regarding overall or disease-free survival. Multimodal RFA for HCC in patients with severe cirrhosis is associated with less invasiveness and shorter hospital stays, with no compromise in the patients' survival. In patients with severe cirrhosis, it may be time to consider changing the standard treatment for primary HCC within the Milan criteria to multimodal RFA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 29%
Other 2 14%
Unspecified 1 7%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Lecturer 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 57%
Unspecified 1 7%
Unknown 5 36%
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 05 June 2018.
All research outputs
#18,637,483
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#4,800
of 6,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,906
of 329,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#106
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 329,782 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.