Long-term outcomes of single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective comparative analysis.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Chang Ho Seo, Ho Joong Choi, Young Kyoung You
{"title":"Long-term outcomes of single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective comparative analysis.","authors":"Chang Ho Seo, Ho Joong Choi, Young Kyoung You","doi":"10.4174/astr.2024.106.6.354","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Numerous efforts have been made to achieve minimally invasive surgery, such as single-port laparoscopic surgery. However, few studies have provided long-term follow-up information, and the number of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in previous studies has been small. The purpose in this study is to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of HCC patients who underwent single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy (SPLH) with those of patients who underwent multiport laparoscopic hepatectomy (MPLH).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 135 patients with HCC who underwent laparoscopic liver between January 2008 and December 2018. Of the 135 patients, 53 underwent MPLH, and 82 underwent SPLH.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From January 2008 to December 2018, 135 patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC. Among them, 82 patients underwent SPLH, and 53 patients underwent MPLH. Neither long-term overall survival (P = 0.849) nor recurrence-free survival (P = 0.057) differed significantly between the 2 groups, even though the recurrence rate was higher in the SPLH group. In the univariable analysis of risk factors for recurrence, multiple tumors, SPLH method, and portal vein invasion were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Multivariable analysis showed that the SPLH method and portal vein invasion were independent adverse prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In terms of both short-term and long-term outcomes, the SPLH method seems to be a feasible approach for HCC in select patients. Because the potential risk of margin recurrence might produce poor oncological outcomes, strict patient selection is essential to ensure that an adequate safety margin can be secured.</p>","PeriodicalId":8071,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11164656/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2024.106.6.354","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Numerous efforts have been made to achieve minimally invasive surgery, such as single-port laparoscopic surgery. However, few studies have provided long-term follow-up information, and the number of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in previous studies has been small. The purpose in this study is to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of HCC patients who underwent single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy (SPLH) with those of patients who underwent multiport laparoscopic hepatectomy (MPLH).

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 135 patients with HCC who underwent laparoscopic liver between January 2008 and December 2018. Of the 135 patients, 53 underwent MPLH, and 82 underwent SPLH.

Results: From January 2008 to December 2018, 135 patients underwent laparoscopic hepatectomy for HCC. Among them, 82 patients underwent SPLH, and 53 patients underwent MPLH. Neither long-term overall survival (P = 0.849) nor recurrence-free survival (P = 0.057) differed significantly between the 2 groups, even though the recurrence rate was higher in the SPLH group. In the univariable analysis of risk factors for recurrence, multiple tumors, SPLH method, and portal vein invasion were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Multivariable analysis showed that the SPLH method and portal vein invasion were independent adverse prognostic factors for recurrence-free survival.

Conclusion: In terms of both short-term and long-term outcomes, the SPLH method seems to be a feasible approach for HCC in select patients. Because the potential risk of margin recurrence might produce poor oncological outcomes, strict patient selection is essential to ensure that an adequate safety margin can be secured.

单孔腹腔镜肝切除术治疗肝细胞癌的长期疗效:回顾性对比分析。
目的:为实现单孔腹腔镜手术等微创手术,人们做出了许多努力。然而,很少有研究提供长期随访信息,而且以往研究中的肝细胞癌(HCC)患者人数较少。本研究旨在比较接受单孔腹腔镜肝切除术(SPLH)和多孔腹腔镜肝切除术(MPLH)的 HCC 患者的长期肿瘤治疗效果:我们回顾性地查看了2008年1月至2018年12月期间接受腹腔镜肝脏手术的135例HCC患者的病历。135例患者中,53例接受了MPLH,82例接受了SPLH.结果:135例患者中,53例接受了MPLH,82例接受了SPLH:2008年1月至2018年12月,135名患者因HCC接受了腹腔镜肝切除术。其中,82 例患者接受了 SPLH,53 例患者接受了 MPLH。尽管SPLH组的复发率更高,但两组患者的长期总生存率(P = 0.849)和无复发生存率(P = 0.057)均无显著差异。在复发风险因素的单变量分析中,多发肿瘤、SPLH 方法和门静脉侵犯具有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。多变量分析显示,SPLH方法和门静脉侵犯是无复发生存率的独立不良预后因素:结论:从短期和长期结果来看,SPLH方法似乎是一种可行的HCC治疗方法。由于边缘复发的潜在风险可能会导致不良的肿瘤治疗效果,因此必须严格选择患者,以确保有足够的安全边缘。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Manuscripts to the Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research (Ann Surg Treat Res) should be written in English according to the instructions for authors. If the details are not described below, the style should follow the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publications available at International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) website (http://www.icmje.org).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信