ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Laparoscopic resection combined with ablation for multiple colorectal liver metastases: a multicentre propensity-matched analysis.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLaparoscopic resection is the standard treatment for resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). While the safety profile using combined ablation and resection (CARe) to treat CRLM has been documented, its efficacy has not been compared with that of resection alone in the laparoscopic setting. The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic CARe with those of laparoscopic resection alone for multiple CRLM.
methodsPatients with multiple CRLM who underwent laparoscopic resection at three medical centres from 2018 to 2023 were included. Perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed.
resultsOf the 218 included patients, 67 (30.7%) underwent laparoscopic CARe, and 151 (69.3%) underwent laparoscopic resection alone. After PSM, 49 matched pairs of patients were included for each group. The postoperative complication rate was similar between the two groups (P = 0.964). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) (11.8 vs. 12.1 months, P = 0.759) and overall survival (OS) (not reached, P = 0.656) were not significantly different between the two groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that ≥ 4 CRLM [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-3.15, P = 0.022] and synchronous metastases (HR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.21-3.31, P = 0.007) and was independently associated with RFS, whereas bilobar distribution (HR = 3.20, 95% CI 1.04-9.82, P = 0.042) was independently associated with OS. No statistically significant differences were observed in the timing of recurrence (P = 0.666), the site of recurrence (P = 0.279), or the treatment administered after recurrence (P = 0.641) between the two groups.
conclusionsLaparoscopic CARe may be considered as a useful treatment strategy for multiple CRLM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.