Minireviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Gastroenterol. Feb 21, 2017; 23(7): 1139-1146
Published online Feb 21, 2017. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i7.1139
Table 1 Summary of studies comparing the outcomes of anatomical and non-anatomical resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma
Ref.Study periodPatient number total(AR:NAR)Inclusion criteriaMethod ofARCirrhosis(yes/no)Bleeding amount (mL, AR:NAR)Survival benefit of AR for OS and RFSRecurrence pattern (local or multicentric)Others
D:Dye injectionICG R15
G:GlissonianDifference
B/W AR and NAR
Benefit
Yamamoto et al[18]1990-1994n = 204 (90:114)Solitary ≤ 5 cmGlissonianP = 0.02Not shownYesNA
NAOS (P = 0.0002)
Regimbeau et al[7]1990-1996n = 64 (30:34)Solitary < 4 cmGlissonean + USNANot shownYesNA
NAOS and RFS (P < 0.05)
Hasegawa et al[12]1994-2001n = 210 (156:54)SolitaryDye injection0.002P = 0.8 (574: 560)YesNA
P < 0.0001OS (P = 0.01)
RFS (P = 0.006)
Cho et al[38]1998-2001n = 168 (99:69)Solitary ≤ 5 cmNot describedP = 0.026Not shownYesNA
NAOS (P = 0.032)
RFS (P = 0.003)
Wakai et al[15]1990-2004n = 158 (95:63)Solitary pT1-T2GlissoneanP = 0.015 AR < NARP = 0.017 (813:590)YesNA
P = 0.001OS (P = 0.03) RFS (P = 0.008), for pT2 OS (P = 0.001) and RFS (P = 0.0004)
Yamashita et al[25]1985-2004n = 321 (201:120)SolitaryGlissoneanP < 0.01P < 0.01 (1353:993)YesNA
P < 0.01OS and RFS (P = 0.01) for liver damaged, No for less damaged
Ueno et al[37]1990-2004n = 116 (52:64) ≤ 3 nodules, ≤ 3 cmDye injectionNAP = 0.46 (1609:1224)No for OS (P = 0.19)NA
P = 0.006Yes for RFS (P < 0.03)
Kobayashi et al[33]1990-2004n = 233 (106:127)SolitaryDye injectionP < 0.0001NAYesDifferent
P < 0.0001RFS (P = 0.0002)local recu: AR < NAR (P < 0.002)
Eguchi et al[31]1994-2001n = 5781 (2267:3514)MixedD&G mixedNANot shownYesNAJapanese nationwide survey
OS (P = 0.0529)
RFS (P = 0.0089)
Yamazaki et al[26]1994-2007n = 209 (111:98)Solitary ≤ 5 cmGlissoneanP = 0.003P < 0.0001 (1266:842)YesNA
NAOS (P = 0.004),
RFS (P = 0.023)
No benefit
Capussotti et al[30]1985-2001n = 216 (156:60)No limitationNot clearNANot shownNo OS (P = 0.9)NA
Portolani et al[36]1986-2003n = 213 (131:82)NANot describedNANot shownNoNA
NA
Tanaka et al[14]1992-2005n = 125 (83:42)SolitaryNot clearP = 0.035P = 0.23 (1000:1200)NoNo diff (P = 0.39)
NAOS (P = 0.34)
Kaibori et al[13]1992-2003n = 237 (34:217)HepC(+)Dye injectionP = 0.0060.27 (1779:1414)NoNo diff (P = 0.12)
(OS = 0.7 and DFS 0.76)
Tomimaru et al[27]1990-2008n = 92 (30:62)Solitary ≤ 3 cmNot clearP = 0.4P = 0.03 (1112:756)NoNo diff (P = 0.29)
P = 0.7OS (P = 0.67)
RFS (P = 0.77)
Ahn et al[22]2001-2011n = 140 (65:75)SolitaryDye injectionP = 0.008P = 0.05 (410:559)NoNASegmentectomy vs NAR
P < 0.001OS (P = 0.08)
Marubashi et al[34]2001-2012n = 424 (243:181)No limitationDye injectionNAP < 0.001 (1237:640)NoNo diff (P = 0.23)No difference in recurrence pattern
P < 0.001RFS P = 0.3
Yamamoto et al[29]2003-2013n = 44 (16:28)SolitaryDye injection0.005P = 0.002NoNA
P = 0.029(711:222)OS (P = 0.6), DFS (0.58)
Yes for HBsAg(+) (P = 0.008)
Table 2 Summary of case-control studies using the propensity score matching method to compare the outcomes of anatomical and non-anatomical resection for hepatocellular carcinoma
Ref.Study periodPatient total number and after propensity score matched (AR:NAR)Inclusion criteriaMethod of ARICG R15Bleeding amountSurvival benefit of AR
D:Dye injectionDifference(mL, AR:NAR)
G:GlissonianB/W AR and NAR
Okamura et al[35], 20142002-2013n = 236 (139:97 and 64:64)SolitaryDye injectionP = 0.07P = 0.008 (551:465)No
RFS (P = 0.52)
Ishii et al[32], 20142002-2010n = 268 (110:158 and 44:44)Solitary ≤ 5 cmNot ClearP = 0.0530.9 (400:355)No
OS (P = 0.29) RFS (P = 0.28)
Marubashi et al[28], 20151981-2012n = 1102 (577:525 and 329:329)No limitationNot clearNANot shownNo
OS (P = 0.7) and RFS (P = 0.4)