↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review and meta-analysis of feasibility, safety and efficacy of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) versus two-stage hepatectomy (TSH)

Overview of attention for article published in BioScience Trends, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A systematic review and meta-analysis of feasibility, safety and efficacy of associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) versus two-stage hepatectomy (TSH)
Published in
BioScience Trends, January 2015
DOI 10.5582/bst.2015.01139
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhipeng Sun, Wei Tang, Yoshihiro Sakamoto, Kiyoshi Hasegawa, Norihiro Kokudo

Abstract

This meta-analysis aimed to review the regeneration rate of future liver remnant (FLR) and perioperative outcomes after associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) and two-stage hepatectomy (TSH). A web search was performed in "MEDLINE", "EMBASE", and "SCIENCE DIRECT" databases using both subject headings (MeSH) and truncated word to identify all the articles published that related to this topic. Pooled risk ratios were calculated for categorical variables and mean differences for continuous variables using the fixed-effects and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Three studies involved 282 patients, of whom 234 were in the TSH group and 48 in the ALPPS group. Morbidity was experienced in 56.3% patients in the ALPPS group and 36.1% in the TSH group. There was a statistical difference (RR = 1.08; Z = 3.24; 95% CI, p = 0.001). Second surgeries were performed successfully in 79.1% patients in the portal vein embolization (PVE) group and 100% in the ALPPS group. There was a statistical difference (Z = 2.48; 95% CI, p = 0.01). The mean regeneration rate of FLR in the ALPPS group was 56.4% compared with 52.8% in the TSH group. There was no statistical difference (95% CI, p = 0.34). So from the outcome of this meta-analysis, TSH had a similar remnant liver regeneration ability compared to ALPPS while the morbidity and mortality rates were relatively low. Cancer progression while waiting for the staged liver resection after portal vein embolization was a drawback for TSH.

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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Unknown 37 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Professor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 42%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Philosophy 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 13 34%
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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BioScience Trends
#246
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,541
of 359,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioScience Trends
#16
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. 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 359,530 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 25 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.