Background Resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) originating in the caudate lobe remains challenging, while the optimal extent of resection is debated. We aimed to evaluate the relative benefits of combined caudate lobectomy (CCL) versus isolated caudate lobectomy (ICL) for caudate HCC. Methods Patients who underwent curative-intent resection for caudate HCC between January 2010 and December 2018 were identified from a single-center database. Surgical outcomes of the two strategy groups were analyzed before and after propensity score matching. A systematic review with meta-analysis was also performed to compare outcomes of CCL versus ICL for caudate HCC. Results A total of 28 patients were included: 11 in the CCL and 17 in the ICL group. Compared with ICL, the CCL group contained patients with larger tumors and a higher incidence of vascular invasion. After propensity score matching, 6 pairs of patients were selected. In the well-matched cohort, CCL demonstrated significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) ( P = 0.047) compared with ICL; no significant differences were noted for overall survival (OS), operation time, blood loss and morbidity rate. A total of 227 patients from nine eligible studies and ours were involved in the systematic review. Meta-analysis revealed that CCL provided better RFS (hazard ratio 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.31–0.92) than ICL; no significant differences were observed in OS, operation time, blood loss and morbidity rate. Conclusion CCL confers superior RFS over ICL without compromise of perioperative outcomes and should be prioritized for patients with caudate HCC when feasible, especially for those with large-sized tumors.
Background: Application of controlled low central venous pressure (LCVP) in liver resection growing in popularity, but its efficacy and safety are still controversial. Our objectives were to assess and compare the efficacy, feasibility, and safety of controlled LCVP in patients undergoing liver resection. Methods:The PubMed, Cochrane library, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched for all the relevant studies regardless of study design. We evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies and excluded studies of poor quality. Moreover, we applied a systematic review and meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.3 software to compare the efficacy and safety of LCVP vs. standard CVP for liver resection.Outcomes included operation time, blood loss, blood infusion, fluid infusion, urinary volume, postoperative complication rates, and hospital stay.Results: In total, 10 studies, involving 324 patients undergoing liver resection with controlled LCVP, were identified. Meta-analysis displayed that blood loss in the LCVP group was dramatically less than that in the control group (standard CVP group, mean difference (MD): -581.68; 95% CI: -886.32 to -277.05; P=0.0002). Moreover, blood transfusion in the LCVP group was also markedly less than that in the control
Background Improved prognostic prediction is needed to stratify patients with early hepatocellular carcinoma (EHCC) to refine selection of adjuvant therapy. We aimed to develop a machine learning (ML)-based model to predict survival after liver resection for EHCC based on readily available clinical data. Methods We analyzed data of surgically resected EHCC (tumor≤5 cm without evidence of extrahepatic disease or major vascular invasion) patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program to train and internally validate a gradient-boosting ML model to predict disease‐specific survival (DSS). We externally tested the ML model using data from 2 Chinese institutions. Patients treated with resection were matched by propensity score to those treated with transplantation in the SEER-Medicare database. Results A total of 2778 EHCC patients treated with resection were enrolled, divided into 1899 for training/validation (SEER) and 879 for test (Chinese). The ML model consisted of 8 covariates (age, race, alpha-fetoprotein, tumor size, multifocality, vascular invasion, histological grade and fibrosis score) and predicted DSS with C-Statistics >0.72, better than proposed staging systems across study cohorts. The ML model could stratify 10-year DSS ranging from 70% in low-risk subset to 5% in high-risk subset. Compared with low-risk subset, no remarkable survival benefits were observed in EHCC patients receiving transplantation before and after propensity score matching. Conclusion An ML model trained on a large-scale dataset has good predictive performance at individual scale. Such a model is readily integrated into clinical practice and will be valuable in discussing treatment strategies.
CircRNAs have been reported to be related to hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development. Limited studies have revealed the expression profile of circRNAs in tumor and para-tumor normal samples in HCC patients. We found that circASPH was significantly increased in HCC tumor samples and that the level of circASPH was closely related to the overall survival of HCC patients. Mechanistically, circASPH could regulate the methylation of the promoter and expression of hydrocyanic oxidase 2 (HAO2) to promote HCC progression by acting as a sponge for miR-370-3p, and miR-370-3p could target DNMT3b and increase the 5mC level. In summary, our study determined that circASPH could regulate the methylation and expression of HAO2 and it could be considered an important epigenetic regulator in HCC progression.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.