Ying Chen, Hongyu Shen, Ruiqin Xu, Jiahai Zhu, Ya Zhu, Hao Zou
{"title":"肝移植与肝切除治疗肝内胆管癌的预后比较:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ying Chen, Hongyu Shen, Ruiqin Xu, Jiahai Zhu, Ya Zhu, Hao Zou","doi":"10.21037/cco-24-86","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Liver resection (LR) remains the only curative approach for patients diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Although margin-negative resection can be achieved, long-term oncological outcomes still need improvement. Recent studies from both single and multi-institutional settings have indicated that liver transplantation (LT) could be a feasible treatment option for ICC under particular conditions. While some research has compared LT with LR in treating ICC patients, the results of these comparisons remain controversial. This meta-analysis compares the surgical outcomes of LT and LR for ICC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a thorough search of the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed for articles comparing the ICC of LT and LR published from January 2000 to April 2024. The studies' relevance and quality were assessed independently by two investigators. Odds ratios (ORs) were utilized to evaluate dichotomous data, and fixed-effects were employed for meta-analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies were analyzed in this meta-analysis, revealing no significant difference in 1-year overall survival rates between LT and LR. However, LT showed significantly higher 3-year, and 5-year overall survival rates compared to LR, with ORs of 1.39 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-1.84, P=0.02] at 3 years, 1.71 (95% CI: 1.30-2.26, P<0.001) at 5 years. The advantage of LT over LR in terms of overall survival became evident at 3 years, 5 years, and post-operation, despite not being apparent in the first year. Additionally, the R0 resection rate was higher following LT than LR (P=0.006), potentially contributing to the superior long-term outcomes of LT. Subgroup analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in survival outcomes between the two treatment regimens when LT failed to achieve R0 resection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For patients with ICC, LT seems to have optimistic survival results under certain conditions compared with curative hepatectomy. Since LT is a potential treatment for ICC, it is currently uncertain whether LT should be more considered in patients with ICC. Further prospective trials are required to demonstrate its efficacy in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":9945,"journal":{"name":"Chinese clinical oncology","volume":"14 1","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative prognosis of liver transplantation versus liver resection in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ying Chen, Hongyu Shen, Ruiqin Xu, Jiahai Zhu, Ya Zhu, Hao Zou\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/cco-24-86\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Liver resection (LR) remains the only curative approach for patients diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Although margin-negative resection can be achieved, long-term oncological outcomes still need improvement. Recent studies from both single and multi-institutional settings have indicated that liver transplantation (LT) could be a feasible treatment option for ICC under particular conditions. While some research has compared LT with LR in treating ICC patients, the results of these comparisons remain controversial. This meta-analysis compares the surgical outcomes of LT and LR for ICC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a thorough search of the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed for articles comparing the ICC of LT and LR published from January 2000 to April 2024. The studies' relevance and quality were assessed independently by two investigators. Odds ratios (ORs) were utilized to evaluate dichotomous data, and fixed-effects were employed for meta-analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies were analyzed in this meta-analysis, revealing no significant difference in 1-year overall survival rates between LT and LR. However, LT showed significantly higher 3-year, and 5-year overall survival rates compared to LR, with ORs of 1.39 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-1.84, P=0.02] at 3 years, 1.71 (95% CI: 1.30-2.26, P<0.001) at 5 years. The advantage of LT over LR in terms of overall survival became evident at 3 years, 5 years, and post-operation, despite not being apparent in the first year. Additionally, the R0 resection rate was higher following LT than LR (P=0.006), potentially contributing to the superior long-term outcomes of LT. Subgroup analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in survival outcomes between the two treatment regimens when LT failed to achieve R0 resection.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For patients with ICC, LT seems to have optimistic survival results under certain conditions compared with curative hepatectomy. Since LT is a potential treatment for ICC, it is currently uncertain whether LT should be more considered in patients with ICC. Further prospective trials are required to demonstrate its efficacy in the future.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese clinical oncology\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/cco-24-86\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/cco-24-86","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:肝切除(LR)仍然是诊断为肝内胆管癌(ICC)患者的唯一治疗方法。虽然可以实现边缘阴性切除,但长期肿瘤预后仍有待改善。最近来自单一和多机构的研究表明,在特定条件下,肝移植(LT)可能是ICC的可行治疗选择。虽然一些研究比较了肝移植和肝移植在治疗ICC患者中的作用,但这些比较的结果仍然存在争议。本荟萃分析比较了ICC的左左和左左手术结果。方法:我们对Cochrane图书馆、Web of Science和PubMed进行了全面的检索,以比较2000年1月至2024年4月发表的LT和LR的ICC。研究的相关性和质量由两位研究者独立评估。比值比(ORs)用于评估二分类数据,固定效应用于meta分析。结果:本荟萃分析分析了5项研究,显示LT和LR的1年总生存率无显著差异。然而,与LR相比,LT显示出明显更高的3年和5年总生存率,3年的or为1.39[95%可信区间(CI): 1.04-1.84, P=0.02], 1.71 (95% CI: 1.30-2.26)。结论:对于ICC患者,在某些条件下,与根治性肝切除术相比,LT似乎具有乐观的生存结果。由于肝移植是ICC的一种潜在治疗方法,目前尚不确定是否应该在ICC患者中更多地考虑肝移植。需要进一步的前瞻性试验来证明其未来的有效性。
Comparative prognosis of liver transplantation versus liver resection in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Background: Liver resection (LR) remains the only curative approach for patients diagnosed with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC). Although margin-negative resection can be achieved, long-term oncological outcomes still need improvement. Recent studies from both single and multi-institutional settings have indicated that liver transplantation (LT) could be a feasible treatment option for ICC under particular conditions. While some research has compared LT with LR in treating ICC patients, the results of these comparisons remain controversial. This meta-analysis compares the surgical outcomes of LT and LR for ICC.
Methods: We conducted a thorough search of the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed for articles comparing the ICC of LT and LR published from January 2000 to April 2024. The studies' relevance and quality were assessed independently by two investigators. Odds ratios (ORs) were utilized to evaluate dichotomous data, and fixed-effects were employed for meta-analyses.
Results: Five studies were analyzed in this meta-analysis, revealing no significant difference in 1-year overall survival rates between LT and LR. However, LT showed significantly higher 3-year, and 5-year overall survival rates compared to LR, with ORs of 1.39 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-1.84, P=0.02] at 3 years, 1.71 (95% CI: 1.30-2.26, P<0.001) at 5 years. The advantage of LT over LR in terms of overall survival became evident at 3 years, 5 years, and post-operation, despite not being apparent in the first year. Additionally, the R0 resection rate was higher following LT than LR (P=0.006), potentially contributing to the superior long-term outcomes of LT. Subgroup analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in survival outcomes between the two treatment regimens when LT failed to achieve R0 resection.
Conclusions: For patients with ICC, LT seems to have optimistic survival results under certain conditions compared with curative hepatectomy. Since LT is a potential treatment for ICC, it is currently uncertain whether LT should be more considered in patients with ICC. Further prospective trials are required to demonstrate its efficacy in the future.
期刊介绍:
The Chinese Clinical Oncology (Print ISSN 2304-3865; Online ISSN 2304-3873; Chin Clin Oncol; CCO) publishes articles that describe new findings in the field of oncology, and provides current and practical information on diagnosis, prevention and clinical investigations of cancer. Specific areas of interest include, but are not limited to: multimodality therapy, biomarkers, imaging, tumor biology, pathology, chemoprevention, and technical advances related to cancer. The aim of the Journal is to provide a forum for the dissemination of original research articles as well as review articles in all areas related to cancer. It is an international, peer-reviewed journal with a focus on cutting-edge findings in this rapidly changing field. To that end, Chin Clin Oncol is dedicated to translating the latest research developments into best multimodality practice. The journal features a distinguished editorial board, which brings together a team of highly experienced specialists in cancer treatment and research. The diverse experience of the board members allows our editorial panel to lend their expertise to a broad spectrum of cancer subjects.