Published online Nov 15, 2021. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v13.i11.1833
Peer-review started: January 14, 2021
First decision: May 3, 2021
Revised: May 8, 2021
Accepted: July 13, 2021
Article in press: July 13, 2021
Published online: November 15, 2021
Processing time: 301 Days and 19.8 Hours
Patients diagnosed with solitary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) always receive liver resection. More and more patients are undergoing anatomical hepatectomy which aims to eradicate tumor. Accumulating studies had been performed to compare these two kinds of surgical technique. However, it is still not yet whether anatomical hepatectomy is superior to non-anatomical hepatectomy.
Clarifying the survival benefits of anatomical and non-anatomical hepatectomy is of vital importance for patients with solitary HCC. Furthermore, it will be instructive for doctors to choose better surgical method.
To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on short- and long-term results of anatomical and non-anatomical hepatectomy in patients with solitary HCC.
PubMed, Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library were searched for articles from the inception of each database to 2020 according to the designed extraction scheme, and statistical analysis was performed using Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.3 software. The quality of included papers was assessed with the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The main results of this study included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).
Fourteen studies (9444 patients) comparing anatomical and non-anatomical hepatectomy were included for final analysis with 4260 cases of anatomical resection (AR) and 5184 cases of non-anatomical resection (NAR). Anatomical hepatectomy was associated with a higher 5-year OS [odds ratio (OR): 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08-1.30] and DFS (OR: 1.26, 95%CI: 1.15-1.39). AR was associated with longer operating time [mean difference (MD): 47.08; P < 0.001], more blood loss (MD: 169.29; P = 0.001), and wider surgical margin (MD = 1.35; P = 0.04) compared to NAR. There was no obvious difference in blood transfusion ratio (OR: 1.16; P = 0.65) or postoperative complications between the two groups (OR: 1.24, P = 0.18).
This meta-analysis confirmed that AR is superior to NAR in terms of long-term outcomes. Thus, AR can be recommended as a reasonable surgical approach in patients with solitary HCC.
There are some limitations that should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results. The most vital limitation is that the included studies are non-randomized controlled trial and retrospective. Future studies with large-scale and well-designed randomized controlled trial are needed to further verify the benefits of anatomical hepatectomy for patients with solitary HCC.