| Title |
The Predictors of Microscopic Vessel Invasion Differ Between Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Hepatocellular Carcinoma with a Treatment History
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Surgery, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00268-018-4658-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yukiyasu Okamura, Teiichi Sugiura, Takaaki Ito, Yusuke Yamamoto, Ryo Ashida, Takeshi Aramaki, Katsuhiko Uesaka |
| Abstract |
Previous studies have shown that microscopic vessel invasion (MVI) occurs in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with a treatment history due to its poorer malignant behavior in comparison with primary HCC. The aim of the present study was to determine the predictors of MVI and overall survival in HCC patients with a treatment history. This retrospective study included 580 patients who underwent hepatectomy and whose preoperative imaging showed no evidence of macroscopic vessel invasion. The patients were classified into two groups: primary HCC (n = 425) and HCC with a treatment history (n = 155). MVI was defined as the presence of either microscopic portal vein invasion or venous invasion, which was invisible on preoperative imaging. MVI was identified in 34 (21.9%) patients with a treatment history. A multivariate analysis showed that a high des-gamma-carboxy prothrombin (odds ratio [OR] 5.16, P = 0.002) and a large tumor diameter (OR 2.57, P = 0.030) were the significant predictor of MVI in HCC with a treatment history. Moreover, the presence of MVI (hazard ratio [HR] 2.27, P = 0.001) and tumor diameter >27 mm (HR 2.04, P = 0.006) remained significant predictors of the overall survival in HCC with a treatment history. The tumor diameter cutoff value for predicting MVI (27 mm) in HCC with a treatment history was smaller than in primary HCC (37 mm). The presence of MVI was a significant predictor in the HCC patients with a treatment history. The tumor diameter is an important factor that can be used to predict the presence of MVI, especially in HCC with a treatment history. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 7 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 29% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 29% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
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
#20,520,426
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Surgery
#3,837
of 4,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,334
of 329,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Surgery
#45
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 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 4,273 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 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 329,782 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 57 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.