Radiofrequency-assisted liver resections: comparison of open and laparoscopic techniques.

PAPER pubmed Hepato-gastroenterology 2014 Cohort study Effect: unclear Evidence: Low

Read original paper → PMID: 25699383 Evidence Lab

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: After the first reported laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) twenty years ago, liver surgery still remains one of the last areas of resistance to the offensive of laparoscopy. Radiofrequency assisted laparoscopic liver resection has been recently developed technique for treatment of primary and secondary liver tumors. METHODOLOGY: Over a 5-year period, a total of 134 laparoscopic and open radiofrequency assisted operations were performed in a single institution. LLR was done in 47 patients, and open liver resection (OLR) in 87 patients. RESULTS: The study selection criteria were fulfilled by 134 patients. The mean blood loss for LLR was 68.7 mL, the difference between the groups was significant with lower median of blood loss using laparoscopy (p=0.046). The mean of length of hospital stay in LLR was 7.5 days versus 8.7 days in OLR (p=0.071). The 5-year survival rate was 67.0% after LLR and 63.8% after OLR. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 59.4% after LLR, and 62.2% after OLR. The difference between groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic liver resection is safe and feasible procedure. The hand-assisted laparoscopic radiofrequency technique can be applied effectively for selected patients. Preliminary oncological results suggest non-inferiority of laparoscopic to open procedures.

AI evidence extraction

At a glance

Study type

Cohort study

Effect direction

unclear

Population

Patients undergoing radiofrequency-assisted liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumors

Sample size

134

Exposure

radiofrequency-assisted surgical technique · Over a 5-year period

Evidence strength

Low

Confidence: 74% · Peer-reviewed: yes

Main findings

In 134 radiofrequency-assisted liver resections (47 laparoscopic, 87 open), mean blood loss was lower in the laparoscopic group (68.7 mL) with a statistically significant difference (p=0.046). Length of stay was 7.5 vs 8.7 days (p=0.071). Five-year survival (67.0% vs 63.8%) and 5-year disease-free survival (59.4% vs 62.2%) did not differ significantly between groups; authors conclude laparoscopic approach is safe/feasible with preliminary non-inferior oncologic results.

Outcomes measured

Blood loss
Length of hospital stay
5-year survival rate
5-year disease-free survival rate
Safety/feasibility

Limitations

Single-institution study
Non-randomized comparison (laparoscopic vs open)
Exposure parameters (frequency, power, SAR) not reported
Patient selection criteria and tumor characteristics not detailed in abstract

View raw extracted JSON

{
    "study_type": "cohort",
    "exposure": {
        "band": null,
        "source": "radiofrequency-assisted surgical technique",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": "Over a 5-year period"
    },
    "population": "Patients undergoing radiofrequency-assisted liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumors",
    "sample_size": 134,
    "outcomes": [
        "Blood loss",
        "Length of hospital stay",
        "5-year survival rate",
        "5-year disease-free survival rate",
        "Safety/feasibility"
    ],
    "main_findings": "In 134 radiofrequency-assisted liver resections (47 laparoscopic, 87 open), mean blood loss was lower in the laparoscopic group (68.7 mL) with a statistically significant difference (p=0.046). Length of stay was 7.5 vs 8.7 days (p=0.071). Five-year survival (67.0% vs 63.8%) and 5-year disease-free survival (59.4% vs 62.2%) did not differ significantly between groups; authors conclude laparoscopic approach is safe/feasible with preliminary non-inferior oncologic results.",
    "effect_direction": "unclear",
    "limitations": [
        "Single-institution study",
        "Non-randomized comparison (laparoscopic vs open)",
        "Exposure parameters (frequency, power, SAR) not reported",
        "Patient selection criteria and tumor characteristics not detailed in abstract"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "radiofrequency-assisted",
        "liver resection",
        "laparoscopic",
        "open surgery",
        "blood loss",
        "hospital stay",
        "survival",
        "disease-free survival"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": []
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract/metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.

Comments

No comments yet.