MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes
Journal Article

Laparoscopic Compared to Open Repeat Hepatectomy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: a Multi-institutional Propensity-Matched Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

2017
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Introduction While uptake of laparoscopic hepatectomy has improved, evidence on laparoscopic re-hepatectomy (LRH) for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) is limited and has never been compared to the open approach. We sought to define outcomes of LRH compared to open re-hepatectomy (ORH). Methods Patients undergoing re-hepatectomy for CRLM at 39 institutions (2006–2013) were identified. Primary outcomes were 30-day post-operative overall morbidity, mortality, and length of stay. Secondary outcomes were recurrence and survival at latest follow-up. LRHs were matched to ORHs (1:3) using a propensity score created by comparing pre-operative clinicopathologic factors (number and size of liver metastases and major hepatectomy). Results Of 376 re-hepatectomies included, 27 were LRH, including 1 (3.7%) conversion. The propensity-matched cohort included 108 patients. Neither median operative time (252 vs. 230 min; p  = 0.82) nor overall 30-day morbidity (48.1 vs. 38.3%; p  = 0.37) differed. Non-specific morbidity (including cardiac, respiratory, infectious, and renal events) decreased with LRH (11.1 vs. 30.9%, p  = 0.04), while surgical-specific morbidity, including liver insufficiency, was higher (44.4 vs. 22.2%, p  = 0.03). One ORH and 0 LRH suffered 30-day mortality. Median length of stay (9 vs. 12 days; p  = 0.60) was comparable. At latest follow-up, 26 (96.3%) LRH and 67 (82.7%) ORH patients were alive. Eight (29.6%) LRH and 36 (44.4%) ORH patients were alive without disease. Conclusion LRH for recurrent CRLM was associated with overall short-term outcomes comparable to ORH, but different morbidity profiles. While it may offer a safe and feasible approach, further insight is necessary to better define patient selection.