ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Impact of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease on the outcomes following laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease on survival outcomes in patients undergoing radical resection for hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Predictive Value of Hepatic Steatosis for Postoperative Recurrence in Hepatitis B-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Development of a Machine Learning-Based Prognostic Model.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) on laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of LLR for MAFLD-HCC and Non-MAFLD-HCC.
methodsPatients with HCC who received LLR between October 2017 and July 2021 were enrolled. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to generate adjusted comparisons. Both short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated accordingly.
resultsA total of 887 patients were enrolled, with 140 in MAFLD group and 747 in Non-MAFLD group. After IPTW adjustment, baseline factors were well matched. The MAFLD group was associated with more blood loss (210 vs 150 ml, p = 0.022), but with similar postoperative hospital stays and complication rates. The 1- and 3-year overall survival rates were 97.4% and 92.5% in MAFLD group, and 97.5% and 88.3% in Non-MAFLD group, respectively (p = 0.14). The 1- and 3-year disease-free survival rates were 84.8% and 62.9% in MAFLD group, and 80.2% and 58.8% in Non-MAFLD group, respectively (p = 0.31).
conclusionsLLR for MAFLD-HCC was associated with more blood loss but with comparable postoperative recovery and long-term survival compared with Non-MAFLD-HCC patients. LLR is feasible and safe for HCC patients with MAFLD background.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39266759What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.