4.3 Article

The efficacy and safety of pure laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in super-elderly patients over 80 years: A multicenter propensity analysis

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jhbp.1395

Keywords

aged 80 and over; complications; hepatectomy; hepatocellular carcinoma; laparoscopy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the safety of laparoscopic liver resection in hepatocellular carcinoma patients aged >= 80 years. The results showed that laparoscopic liver resection is a safe and feasible option in this age group, with lower rates of intraoperative bleeding and cardiopulmonary complications.
Background: Very few reports have evaluated the safety of laparoscopic liver resection in super-elderly patients. We assessed the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma aged >= 80 years, using propensity score matching.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 287 patients (aged >= 80 years) who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma at eight hospitals belonging to Hiroshima Surgical study group of Clinical Oncology, between January 2012 and December 2021. The perioperative outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open liver resection, using propensity score matching.Results: Of the 287 patients, 83 and 204 were included in the laparoscopic and open liver resection groups, respectively. Propensity score matching was performed, and 52 patients were included in each group. The operation (p = .68) and pringle maneuver (p = .11) time were not different between the groups. There were no significant differences in the incidences of bile leakage or organ failure. The laparoscopic liver resection group had significantly less intraoperative bleeding and a lower incidence of cardiopulmonary complications (both p < .01).Conclusions: Laparoscopic liver resection can be safely performed in elderly patients aged >= 80 years.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available