IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0186930.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficacy and safety of anatomic resection versus nonanatomic resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A systemic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yifei Tan
  • Wei Zhang
  • Li Jiang
  • Jiayin Yang
  • Lunan Yan

Abstract

Background: The surgical decision of performing anatomic resection (AR) or nonanatomic resection (NAR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma remains controversial. The aim of the current study is to conduct a meta-analysis on published results to compare surgical outcomes after AR and NAR. Methods: A comprehensive search of the Pubmed, Ovid-Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and Science Citation indexes was performed. Overall and disease free survival (DFS), perioperative mortality and morbidity were the main outcomes. The meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 statistical software, and the results are expressed as the relative risk (RR) or weighted mean differences with 95% of confidence intervals. Results: After application of the exclusion and inclusion criteria, 25 studies published between 1996~2015 that compared outcomes after AR and NAR in patients with HCC were identified. A total of 10216 patients were included in the meta-analysis, 4576 in the AR group and 5640 in the NAR group. Liver cirrhosis was found in 54.8% (range from 18.8% to 100%) of patients in the AR group and 67.8% (range from 34.3% to 100%) of patients in the NAR group, resulting in a RR of 0.45 (I2 = 18%, fixed model, 95% CI 0.39–0.52; Z = 10.31; P =

Suggested Citation

  • Yifei Tan & Wei Zhang & Li Jiang & Jiayin Yang & Lunan Yan, 2017. "Efficacy and safety of anatomic resection versus nonanatomic resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A systemic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0186930
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186930
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186930
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186930&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0186930?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0186930. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.