A Meta-analysis comparing the effect of anatomical resection vs. non-anatomical resection on the long-term outcomes for patients undergoing hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Issue 10 (October 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Huang, Xinli; Lu, Sen
• Is Part Of: HPB. Volume 19:Issue 10(2017)
• Page Start: 843
• Page End: 849
• Publication Date: 2017-10
• Subjects: Liver -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Biliary tract -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Pancreas -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.362005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.06.003
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1365-182X

Abstract

Abstract: Background: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing anatomical resection (AR) versus non-anatomical resection (NAR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from the published comparative studies within the literatures. Methods: A meta-analysis of studies published from 2001 to 2010 were conducted using RevMan 5.0. Measured outcomes were morbidity, mortality, recurrence and 5 year overall (OS) and disease free (DFS) survival. Results: Seventeen observational studies involving 3129 patients were analyzed: 1626 (52%) in AR group and 1503 (48%) in NAR group. The 5-year OS (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.03–1.36; P = 0.018) and DFS (RR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.23–1.97; P < 0.001) were significantly greater in the AR group than the NAR group, while the overall recurrence was significantly lower (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75–0.94; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80–1.25; P = 0.980) or morbidity (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.48–1.99; P = 0.943) between the AR and NAR groups. Conclusion: AR for HCC is superior to NAR considering its higher 5-year OS and DFS rates and lower overall recurrence rate. Heterogeneity detection within the analysis suggests these results should be interpreted with caution and further well designed studies are required to address this issue.