Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases
Background There is a need for high‐level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using pro...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of surgery 2016-10, Vol.103 (11), p.1504-1512 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1512 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 11 |
| container_start_page | 1504 |
| container_title | British journal of surgery |
| container_volume | 103 |
| creator | Cipriani, F. Rawashdeh, M. Stanton, L. Armstrong, T. Takhar, A. Pearce, N. W. Primrose, J. Abu Hilal, M. |
| description | Background
There is a need for high‐level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias.
Methods
This was a single‐centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co‐variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed.
Results
Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5‐year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis.
Conclusion
Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long‐term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.
Good results for laparoscopic liver resections |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/bjs.10211 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1823031529</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2088230673</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6261-e1a32f61e035e00a2fc8a84590373489b0ff82dd39c94d03efa11acb373abf263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kUFv1DAQhS0EokvhwB9AlrhwCR3bm8Q5QqFbUAVIgDhajjOWvDjr1JNA99_j7pYeOCBb8rPnmydrHmPPBbwWAPKs31IRUogHbCVUU1dSNPohWwFAWwkl1Ql7QrQFEApq-ZidyHaty2pX7PpLThPuKMx7Ti5lrHpLOHC7s3FPgXjyPC2zSyMedLSTzamQU3D8F2ZaynMx4DGUG89I6OaQdtynzF2KxdHNNvIRZ0tlIz1lj7yNhM_uzlP2_eL9t_PL6urz5sP5m6vKNbIRFQqrpG8EgqoRwErvtNXrugPVqrXuevBey2FQnevWAyj0Vgjr-lK1vZeNOmWvjr5TTtcL0mzGQA5jtDtMCxmhpQIlatkV9OU_6DYtuUyAjAR9yzWt-h9VvCQo1QEU6sUdtfQjDmbKYbR5b_6OvABnR-B3iLi_rwswt1makqU5ZGnefvx6EKWjOnYEmvHmvsPmn6b8q63Nj08b0152WrzbgKnVH8cxn9Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1822033900</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Cipriani, F. ; Rawashdeh, M. ; Stanton, L. ; Armstrong, T. ; Takhar, A. ; Pearce, N. W. ; Primrose, J. ; Abu Hilal, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Cipriani, F. ; Rawashdeh, M. ; Stanton, L. ; Armstrong, T. ; Takhar, A. ; Pearce, N. W. ; Primrose, J. ; Abu Hilal, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
There is a need for high‐level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias.
Methods
This was a single‐centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co‐variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed.
Results
Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5‐year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis.
Conclusion
Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long‐term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.
Good results for laparoscopic liver resections</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1323</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2168</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10211</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27484847</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJSUAM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Colorectal Neoplasms ; Female ; Hepatectomy - methods ; Hepatectomy - mortality ; Hepatectomy - statistics & numerical data ; Humans ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Laparoscopy ; Laparoscopy - methods ; Laparoscopy - mortality ; Laparoscopy - statistics & numerical data ; Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data ; Liver ; Liver Neoplasms - mortality ; Liver Neoplasms - secondary ; Liver Neoplasms - surgery ; Male ; Metastasis ; Middle Aged ; Operative Time ; Propensity Score ; Prospective Studies ; Retrospective Studies ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>British journal of surgery, 2016-10, Vol.103 (11), p.1504-1512</ispartof><rights>2016 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2016 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 BJS Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c6261-e1a32f61e035e00a2fc8a84590373489b0ff82dd39c94d03efa11acb373abf263</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fbjs.10211$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fbjs.10211$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27484847$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cipriani, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rawashdeh, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Takhar, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearce, N. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Primrose, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abu Hilal, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases</title><title>British journal of surgery</title><addtitle>Br J Surg</addtitle><description>Background
There is a need for high‐level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias.
Methods
This was a single‐centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co‐variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed.
Results
Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5‐year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis.
Conclusion
Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long‐term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.
Good results for laparoscopic liver resections</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Colorectal Neoplasms</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Hepatectomy - methods</subject><subject>Hepatectomy - mortality</subject><subject>Hepatectomy - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - mortality</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Liver</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - mortality</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - secondary</subject><subject>Liver Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Metastasis</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Propensity Score</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0007-1323</issn><issn>1365-2168</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kUFv1DAQhS0EokvhwB9AlrhwCR3bm8Q5QqFbUAVIgDhajjOWvDjr1JNA99_j7pYeOCBb8rPnmydrHmPPBbwWAPKs31IRUogHbCVUU1dSNPohWwFAWwkl1Ql7QrQFEApq-ZidyHaty2pX7PpLThPuKMx7Ti5lrHpLOHC7s3FPgXjyPC2zSyMedLSTzamQU3D8F2ZaynMx4DGUG89I6OaQdtynzF2KxdHNNvIRZ0tlIz1lj7yNhM_uzlP2_eL9t_PL6urz5sP5m6vKNbIRFQqrpG8EgqoRwErvtNXrugPVqrXuevBey2FQnevWAyj0Vgjr-lK1vZeNOmWvjr5TTtcL0mzGQA5jtDtMCxmhpQIlatkV9OU_6DYtuUyAjAR9yzWt-h9VvCQo1QEU6sUdtfQjDmbKYbR5b_6OvABnR-B3iLi_rwswt1makqU5ZGnefvx6EKWjOnYEmvHmvsPmn6b8q63Nj08b0152WrzbgKnVH8cxn9Y</recordid><startdate>201610</startdate><enddate>201610</enddate><creator>Cipriani, F.</creator><creator>Rawashdeh, M.</creator><creator>Stanton, L.</creator><creator>Armstrong, T.</creator><creator>Takhar, A.</creator><creator>Pearce, N. W.</creator><creator>Primrose, J.</creator><creator>Abu Hilal, M.</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201610</creationdate><title>Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases</title><author>Cipriani, F. ; Rawashdeh, M. ; Stanton, L. ; Armstrong, T. ; Takhar, A. ; Pearce, N. W. ; Primrose, J. ; Abu Hilal, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c6261-e1a32f61e035e00a2fc8a84590373489b0ff82dd39c94d03efa11acb373abf263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Colorectal Neoplasms</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Hepatectomy - methods</topic><topic>Hepatectomy - mortality</topic><topic>Hepatectomy - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - mortality</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Liver</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - mortality</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - secondary</topic><topic>Liver Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Metastasis</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Propensity Score</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cipriani, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rawashdeh, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Armstrong, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Takhar, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearce, N. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Primrose, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abu Hilal, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cipriani, F.</au><au>Rawashdeh, M.</au><au>Stanton, L.</au><au>Armstrong, T.</au><au>Takhar, A.</au><au>Pearce, N. W.</au><au>Primrose, J.</au><au>Abu Hilal, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases</atitle><jtitle>British journal of surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Surg</addtitle><date>2016-10</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>103</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1504</spage><epage>1512</epage><pages>1504-1512</pages><issn>0007-1323</issn><eissn>1365-2168</eissn><coden>BJSUAM</coden><abstract>Background
There is a need for high‐level evidence regarding the added value of laparoscopic (LLR) compared with open (OLR) liver resection. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) undergoing LLR and OLR using propensity score matching to minimize bias.
Methods
This was a single‐centre retrospective study using a prospective database of patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM between August 2004 and April 2015. Co‐variates selected for matching included: number and size of lesions, tumour location, extent and number of resections, phase of surgical experience, location and lymph node status of primary tumour, perioperative chemotherapy, unilobar or bilobar disease, synchronous or metachronous disease. Prematching and postmatching analyses were compared. Surgical and oncological outcomes were analysed.
Results
Some 176 patients undergoing LLR and 191 having OLR were enrolled. After matching, 133 patients from each group were compared. At prematching analysis, patients in the LLR group showed a longer overall survival (OS) and higher R0 rate than those in the OLR group (P = 0·047 and P = 0·030 respectively). Postmatching analyses failed to confirm these results, showing similar OS and R0 rate between the LLR and OLR group (median OS: 55·2 versus 65·3 months respectively, hazard ratio 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·42 to 1·05; P = 0·082); R0 rate: 92·5 versus 86·5 per cent, P = 0·186). The 5‐year OS rate was 62·5 (95 per cent c.i. 45·5 to 71·5) per cent) for OLR and 64·3 (48·2 to 69·5) per cent for LLR. Longer duration of surgery, lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative stay were found for LLR on postmatching analysis.
Conclusion
Propensity score matching showed that LLR for CRLM may provide R0 resection rates and long‐term OS comparable to those for OLR, with lower blood loss and morbidity, and shorter postoperative hospital stay.
Good results for laparoscopic liver resections</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>27484847</pmid><doi>10.1002/bjs.10211</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0007-1323 |
| ispartof | British journal of surgery, 2016-10, Vol.103 (11), p.1504-1512 |
| issn | 0007-1323 1365-2168 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1823031529 |
| source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | Adult Aged Colorectal Neoplasms Female Hepatectomy - methods Hepatectomy - mortality Hepatectomy - statistics & numerical data Humans Kaplan-Meier Estimate Laparoscopy Laparoscopy - methods Laparoscopy - mortality Laparoscopy - statistics & numerical data Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data Liver Liver Neoplasms - mortality Liver Neoplasms - secondary Liver Neoplasms - surgery Male Metastasis Middle Aged Operative Time Propensity Score Prospective Studies Retrospective Studies Treatment Outcome |
| title | Propensity score-based analysis of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal metastases |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T23%3A57%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Propensity%20score-based%20analysis%20of%20outcomes%20of%20laparoscopic%20versus%20open%20liver%20resection%20for%20colorectal%20metastases&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20surgery&rft.au=Cipriani,%20F.&rft.date=2016-10&rft.volume=103&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1504&rft.epage=1512&rft.pages=1504-1512&rft.issn=0007-1323&rft.eissn=1365-2168&rft.coden=BJSUAM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/bjs.10211&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2088230673%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1822033900&rft_id=info:pmid/27484847&rfr_iscdi=true |