4.7 Article

Long-Term Survival Analysis of Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Hepatectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Patients With Cirrhosis A Single-Center Experience

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGERY
卷 257, 期 3, 页码 506-511

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31827b947a

关键词

HCC; laparoscopic liver resection; long-term outcome; survival analysis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Laparoscopic liver resection has been reported as a safe and effective approach to the management of liver cancer. However, studies of long-term outcomes regarding tumor recurrence and patient survival in comparison with the conventional open approach are limited. The aim of this study was to analyze the survival outcome of laparoscopic liver resection versus open liver resection. Patients and Methods: Between October 2002 and September 2009, 32 patients underwent pure laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Case-matched control patients (n = 64) who received open liver resection for HCC were included for comparison. Patients were matched in terms of cancer stage, tumor size, location of tumor, and magnitude of resection. Immediate operation outcomes, operation morbidity, disease-free survival, and overall survival were compared between groups. Results: With the laparoscopic group compared with the open resection group, operation time was 232.5 minutes versus 204.5 minutes (P = 0.938), blood loss was 150 mL versus 300 mL (P = 0.001), hospital stay was 4 days versus 7 days (P < 0.0001), postoperative complication was 2 (6.3%) versus 12 (18.8%) (P = 0.184), disease-free survival was 78.5 months versus 29 months (P = 0.086), and overall survival was 92 months versus 71 months (P = 0.142). The disease-free survival for stage II HCC was 22.1 months versus 12.4 months (P = 0.075). Conclusions: Laparoscopic liver resection for HCC is associated with less blood loss, shorter hospital stay, and fewer postoperative complications in selected patients with no compromise in survival.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据