BACKGROUND The long-term survival of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)following anatomical resection(AR)vs non-anatomical resection(NAR)is still controversial.It is necessary to investigate which ap...BACKGROUND The long-term survival of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)following anatomical resection(AR)vs non-anatomical resection(NAR)is still controversial.It is necessary to investigate which approach is better for patients with solitary HCC.AIM To compare perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of AR and NAR for solitary HCC.METHODS We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed,Medline(Ovid),Embase(Ovid),and Cochrane Library.Participants of any age and sex,who underwent liver resection,were considered following the following criteria:(1)Studies reporting AR vs NAR liver resection;(2)Studies focused on primary HCC with a solitary tumor;(3)Studies reporting the long-term survival outcomes(>5 years);and(4)Studies including patients without history of preoperative treatment.The main results were overall survival(OS)and disease-free survival(DFS).Perioperative outcomes were also compared.RESULTS A total of 14 studies,published between 2001 and 2020,were included in our meta-analysis,including 9444 patients who were mainly from China,Japan,and Korea.AR was performed on 4260(44.8%)patients.The synthetic results showed that the 5-year OS[odds ratio(OR):1.19;P<0.001]and DFS(OR:1.26;P<0.001)were significantly better in the AR group than in the NAR group.AR was associated with longer operating time[mean difference(MD):47.08;P<0.001],more blood loss(MD:169.29;P=0.001),and wider surgical margin(MD=1.35;P=0.04)compared to NAR.There was no obvious difference in blood transfusion ratio(OR:1.16;P=0.65)or postoperative complications(OR:1.24,P=0.18).CONCLUSION AR is superior to NAR in terms of long-term outcomes.Thus,AR can be recommended as a reasonable surgical option in patients with solitary HCC.展开更多
基金Supported by National Key Technologies RD Program,No.2018YFC1106803National Natural Science Foundation of China,No.81872004,No.81770615,and No.81672882Science and Technology Support Program of Sichuan Province,No.2019YFQ0001 and No.2017SZ0003。
文摘BACKGROUND The long-term survival of patients with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC)following anatomical resection(AR)vs non-anatomical resection(NAR)is still controversial.It is necessary to investigate which approach is better for patients with solitary HCC.AIM To compare perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of AR and NAR for solitary HCC.METHODS We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed,Medline(Ovid),Embase(Ovid),and Cochrane Library.Participants of any age and sex,who underwent liver resection,were considered following the following criteria:(1)Studies reporting AR vs NAR liver resection;(2)Studies focused on primary HCC with a solitary tumor;(3)Studies reporting the long-term survival outcomes(>5 years);and(4)Studies including patients without history of preoperative treatment.The main results were overall survival(OS)and disease-free survival(DFS).Perioperative outcomes were also compared.RESULTS A total of 14 studies,published between 2001 and 2020,were included in our meta-analysis,including 9444 patients who were mainly from China,Japan,and Korea.AR was performed on 4260(44.8%)patients.The synthetic results showed that the 5-year OS[odds ratio(OR):1.19;P<0.001]and DFS(OR:1.26;P<0.001)were significantly better in the AR group than in the NAR group.AR was associated with longer operating time[mean difference(MD):47.08;P<0.001],more blood loss(MD:169.29;P=0.001),and wider surgical margin(MD=1.35;P=0.04)compared to NAR.There was no obvious difference in blood transfusion ratio(OR:1.16;P=0.65)or postoperative complications(OR:1.24,P=0.18).CONCLUSION AR is superior to NAR in terms of long-term outcomes.Thus,AR can be recommended as a reasonable surgical option in patients with solitary HCC.
