Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao European Journal of ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Article . 2015 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer

Authors: I, Nachmany; N, Pencovich; N, Zohar; A, Ben-Yehuda; C, Binyamin; Y, Goykhman; N, Lubezky; +2 Authors

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer

Abstract

Application of minimally invasive surgery for oncologic liver resection is still limited to expert centers. We describe our experience in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for colorectal liver metastases (CLM).Between February 2010 and February 2015, 174 patients underwent resection of CLM. LLR was chosen according to surgeon's preferences. Data was retrieved from the institutes' electronic charts and retrospectively analyzed.LLR was performed in 42 patients (24.5%) and OLR in 132. Increased number of metastases were found in OLR (2.82 ± 2.81 versus 1.78 ± 1.16, P = 0.02), with no difference in maximal lesion size (33.1 ± 22 versus 34.9 ± 27.5 cm, P = 0.7). Altogether 55 patients underwent major hepatectomy, and 50 of the OLR group (37.8%, 37 right hepatectomy and 7 left hepatectomy) (P = 0.02). In 5 patients (11.6%) a conversion to open surgery was indicated. Operative time was longer in LLR. Estimated blood loss was decreased in laparoscopic minor resections. One OLR patient died during the postoperative period (0.7%). Eight patients in the OLR group had major complications, versus 1 in the LLR group (P = 0.0016). Reoperation within 30 days was performed in 4 OLR patients and none in the LLR group. Patients in the LLR group had shorter length of stay (LOS) (6.78 ± 2.75 versus 8.39 ± 5.64 days, P = 0.038). R0 resection was 88% in both groups.In selected patients with CLM, LLR is feasible, safe and may achieve shorter LOS without inferior oncologic outcome.

Keywords

Male, Liver Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Disease-Free Survival, Treatment Outcome, Feasibility Studies, Hepatectomy, Humans, Female, Laparoscopy, Colorectal Neoplasms, Follow-Up Studies, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    26
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
26
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!