A meta-analysis: laparoscopic versus open liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma

Figures & data

Figure 1. Flow chart of selection process in this meta-analysis.

Table 1. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) score of the literature.

Studies	Selection				Comparability	Exposure			NOS score
	Is the case definition adequate	Representativeness of the cases	Selection of Controls	Definition of Controls	Comparability of cases and controls on the basis of the design or analysis	Ascertainment of exposure	Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls	Non-Response Rate
Jun-hua Ai [15]	1	1	0	1	2	1	1	1	8
L Xiang [8]	1	1	0	1	2	1	1	1	8
Xiu-Tao Fu [16]	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	7
Meng-Hsuan Chian [9]	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	7
Yu-fu Peng [17]	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	8
Wethit Dumronggittigule [18]	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	8
Kang‑Jun Zhang [19]	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	8
Dong-yang Ding [20]	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	8

Table 2. The baseline characteristics quality assessment of the included studies.

Studies	Year	Research type	Study area	Number of patients		Gender (male/female)		Age (year)		Tumor diameter (cm)		HBV carrier		Liver cirrhosis		Child-Pugh grade (A/B)
				LLR	OLR	LLR	OLR	LLR	OLR	LLR	OLR	LLR	OLR	LLR	OLR	LLR	OLR
Ai, J. H. et al. [15]	2013	Retrospective study	China	97	178	75/22	137/41	50.94 ± 12.66	51.84 ± 13.54	7.85 ± 2.15	7.64 ± 2.36	75	136	78	143	59/38	104/74
Xiang, L. et al. [8]	2016	Prospective study	China	128	207	109/19	171/36	50.9 ± 11.9	50.5 ± 10.7	6.7 ± 1.5	6.9 ± 1.5	106	172	104	167	108/20	183/24
Fu, X. T. et al. [16]	2019	Retrospective study	China	15	51	10/5	47/4	62.0 (28.0–77.0) #	60.0 (26.0–78.0) #	6.0 (5.5–10.0) #	7.0 (5.2–15.0) #	11	34	9	27	NA	NA
Chiang, M. H. et al. [9]	2020	Retrospective study	China	37	85	30/7	69/16	58.73 ± 13.46	58.18 ± 11.71	7.45 ± 2.95	10.91 ± 4.72	20	60	23	45	36/1	85/0
Peng, Y. et al. [17]	2022	Retrospective study	China	40	95	33/7	84/11	52 ± 10.20	51.88 ± 13.30	7.10 ± 1.16	7.94 ± 1.01	32	77	21	56	39/1	92/3
Dumronggittigule, W. et al. [18]	2022	Retrospective study	Korea	70	70	60/10	64/6	60.35 ± 14.38	58.59 ± 13.62	6.0 (5.5–7.3) #	6.0 (5.3–8.0) #	49	45	38	38	66/4	66/4
Zhang, K. J. et al. [19]	2022	Retrospetive study	China	73	73	62/11	63/10	NR	NR	7.5 (6.0–9.0) #	7.5(6.0–10.5) #	64	61	55	55	69/4	66/7
Ding, D. Y. et al. [20]	2023	Retrospective study	China	35	84	28/7	71/13	54.3 ± 12.8	55.6 ± 9.8	NR	NR	NR	NR	17	49	NA	NA

#, median (range)；NR, not reported; HBV, Hepatitis B virus.

Figure 2. Forest plots of the effect of LLR vs. OLR on (A) operation time, (B) intraoperative blood loss, (C) intraoperative transfusion rate, (D) resection margin size, (E) R0 resection rate. Mean difference (MD) and odds ratios (OR) shown with 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 3. Forest plots of the effect of LLR vs. OLR on (A) total postoperative complication rate and (B) major complication rate (≥ grade III). Odds ratios (OR) shown with 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 4. Forest plots of the effect of LLR vs. OLR on postoperative hospital stay time. (A) include five studies, (B) after excluding one study, mean difference shown (MD) with 95% confidence intervals.

Figure 5. Forest plots of the effect of LLR vs. OLR on A) 3-year OS rate, B) 3-year DFS rate. Odds ratios (OR) shown with 95% confidence intervals.

Ai JH, Li JW, Chen J, et al. Feasibility and safety of laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma with a tumor size of 5-10 cm. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e72328. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072328.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Xiang L, Li J, Chen J, et al. Prospective cohort study of laparoscopic and open hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Surg. 2016;103(13):1895–1901. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10294.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fu XT, Tang Z, Shi YH, et al. Laparoscopic versus open left lateral segmentectomy for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2019;29(6):513–519. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000723.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Chiang MH, Tsai KY, Chen HA, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes for laparoscopic liver resection of large hepatocellular carcinomas: a retrospective observation from single-center experience. Asian J Surg. 2021;44(11):1376–1382. doi: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2021.03.027.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Peng Y, Li B, Xu H, et al. Is the anterior approach suitable for laparoscopic right hemihepatectomy in patients with large HCC (5-10 cm)? a propensity score analysis. Surg Endosc. 2022;36(8):6024–6034. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09119-8.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dumronggittigule W, Han HS, Komoltri C, et al. Laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a single center propensity-score-matching comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and long-term survival. Surg Endosc. 2023;37(4):2997–3009. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09812-8.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zhang KJ, Liang L, Diao YK, et al. Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score study. Surg Today. 2023;53(3):322–331. doi: 10.1007/s00595-022-02576-7.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Ding DY, Liu L, Lin KY, et al. Perioperative and long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for BCLC stage a large hepatocellular carcinoma patients in difficult segments: a two-centre, propensity score matching analysis. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1095357. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1095357.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar