Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Pure Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant Liver Tumor： Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection
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.
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?
Pure Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant Liver Tumor： Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection
Do you wish to request the book?
Pure Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant Liver Tumor： Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection
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
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.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Pure Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Malignant Liver Tumor： Anatomic Resection Versus Nonanatomic Resection
2016
Overview
Background： Laparoscopic liver resection （LLR） has been considered to be safe and feasible. However, few studies focused on the comparison between the anatomic and nonanatomic LLR. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative factors and outcomes of the anatomic and nonanatomic LLR, especially the area of liver parenchymal transection and blood loss per unit area. Methods： In this study, surgical and oncological data of patients underwent pure LLR procedures for malignant liver tumor were prospectively collected. Blood loss per unit area of liver parenchymal transection was measured and considered as an important parameter. All procedures were conducted by a single surgeon. Results： During nearly 5 years, 84 patients with malignant liver tumor received a pure LLR procedure were included. Among them, 34 patients received anatomic LLR and 50 received nonanatomic LLR, respectively. Patients of the two groups were similar in terms of demographic features and tumor characteristics, despite the tumor size was significantly larger in the anatomic LLR group than that in the nonanatomic LLR group （4.77 ± 2.57 vs. 2.87 ± 2.10 cm, P = 0.001）. Patients who underwent anatomic resection had longer operation time （364.09 ± 131.22 vs. 252.00±135.21 min, P 〈 0.001） but less blood loss per unit area （7.85 ± 7.17 vs. 14.17 ± 10.43 ml/cm2, P = 0.018）. Nonanatomic LLR was associated with more blood loss when the area of parenchymal transection was equal to the anatomic LLR. No mortality occurred during the hospital stay and 30 days alter the operation. Moreover, there was no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications. The disease-free and overall survival rates showed no significant differences between the anatomic LLR and nonanatomic LLR groups. Conclusions： Both anatomic and nonanatomic pure LLR are safe and feasible. Measuring the area of parenchymal transection is a simple and effective method to estimate the outcomes of the liver resection surgery＇. Blood loss per unit area is an important parameter which is comparable between the anatomic LLR and nonanatomic LLR groups.
Publisher
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow Publications,Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd,Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Ovid Technologies,Department of General Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China,Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd,Wolters Kluwer
