Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies
Open Access

Surgical Indications for Huge Hepatocellular Carcinoma

TAKAFUMI KUMAMOTO, RYUSEI MATSUYAMA, KAZUHISA TAKEDA, YU SAWADA, KOTA SAHARA, DAISUKE MORIOKA, SHAO-CIAO LUO, YASUHIRO YABUSHITA, YUKI HOMMA and ITARU ENDO
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2573-2581; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15735
TAKAFUMI KUMAMOTO
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: t.kumamoto@k5.dion.ne.jp
RYUSEI MATSUYAMA
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
KAZUHISA TAKEDA
2Department of Surgery, Gastroenterological Center, Yokohama City University Medical Center, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YU SAWADA
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
KOTA SAHARA
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DAISUKE MORIOKA
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SHAO-CIAO LUO
3Department of General Surgery, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, R.O.C.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YASUHIRO YABUSHITA
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YUKI HOMMA
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ITARU ENDO
1Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: This study aimed to retrospectively analyse adverse predictors to identify patients with huge hepatocellular carcinoma who were not appropriate candidates for hepatic resection. Patients and Methods: From 551 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent hepatectomy between 1992 and 2019, 92 were diagnosed with huge hepatocellular carcinoma (diameter >10 cm) and 115 were diagnosed with large hepatocellular carcinoma (diameter=5-10 cm). Clinical features and overall and disease-free survival rates were compared between the two groups. Results: Cumulative overall survival was significantly worse in the huge group than in the large group (p=0.035). In the huge group, multivariate analyses revealed that liver cirrhosis, multiple intrahepatic metastases (≥4), poor histological grade, and macroscopic portal vein invasion were significantly associated with poor prognosis. Conclusion: We identified four adverse predictors of survival and determined that patients with two or more predictors are not appropriate candidates for straightforward hepatic resection.

Key Words:
  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • liver resection
  • mortality
  • recurrence
  • surgery

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death after lung, colorectal, and stomach cancers (1). The prognosis of patients with HCC has improved with advances in imaging techniques and therapeutic options such as liver resection, liver transplantation, radiofrequency ablation, transhepatic arterial chemotherapy and embolization (TACE), external radiation, and molecularly targeted therapy (2). Clinical guidelines for HCC have been established in many countries and regions, and the appropriate treatment is selected using treatment algorithms based on performance status, liver function, extrahepatic metastasis, vascular invasion, tumour number, and tumour size (3).

However, huge HCC (≥10 cm) remains difficult to treat because it is frequently accompanied by portal vein tumour thrombus and/or multiple tumours (4-6). In our previous report, the overall survival rates for HCC at 1, 3, and 5 years following surgery were 41.0%, 29.3%, and 29.3%, respectively, and the median survival time (MST) was 10.1 months (7). Moreover, resection of huge HCC is often technically demanding and usually requires major hepatic resection, which may increase bleeding, transfusion, operation time, morbidity, and mortality (8). Previous studies have demonstrated that bleeding, transfusion, and a longer operative time led to a poor prognosis (9-11). Therefore, huge HCC is considered to have a poor prognosis not only because of oncological factors but also iatrogenic factors such as an invasive operation.

We occasionally encounter cases involving early relapse and early mortality due to recurrence after liver resection in huge HCC patients. Accordingly, we retrospectively analysed patient characteristics between large and huge HCC groups and determined the prognostic factors to identify patients with huge HCC who were not appropriate candidates for hepatic resection.

Patients and Methods

Patients and preoperative evaluation. Between January 1992 and December 2019, 551 patients with HCC underwent hepatic resection at Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan. Of these, 92 patients had HCC with a maximum tumour diameter of ≥10 cm (huge HCC group), and 115 had large HCC (tumour diameter between 5 and 10 cm; large HCC group). The institutional review board of Yokohama City University approved this study (approval no. F210900007), which conforms to the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from the patients and/or guardians.

The preoperative evaluation protocol included blood biochemistry, chest and abdominal radiography, electrocardiography, respiratory function test, indocyanine green (ICG) retention rate at 15 min, ultrasonography, contrast computed tomography from the chest to the pelvis, and/or contrast magnetic resonance imaging of the liver. The criteria for liver resection were determined according to the multiple regression equation: y 110 +0.942 × resection rate (%) + 1.36 × ICG retention rate at 15 min (%) + 1.17 × patient’s age + 5.94 × ICG maximal removal rate (mg/kg/min) (12). In cases where y <50, hepatectomy was performed, whereas in cases where y ≥50, we performed portal vein embolization followed by re-evaluation using these criteria 1 month later.

Portal vein tumour thrombus, hepatic vein thrombus, and inferior vena cava tumour thrombus were not considered absolute contraindications for hepatic resection if the tumour thrombus could be eliminated. Four or more intrahepatic metastases were not considered an absolute contraindication for liver resection. We aggressively performed liver resection for large or huge HCCs with four or more intrahepatic metastases if all tumours could be eliminated. Moreover, in cases wherein all tumours could not be removed, we performed reductive hepatic resection for large or huge main tumours and subsequently performed TACE or hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) for residual tumours (13). Following surgery, adjuvant HAIC was administered to HCC patients with portal vein invasion or intrahepatic metastases between 2000 and 2013 (14).

Curative resection was defined as complete microscopic removal of the tumour. All patients received a monthly follow-up from the operator for the first 2 years and every 3 months thereafter. During every visit, serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and PIVKA-II levels were monitored. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) was performed every 4 months during the second year and every 6 months thereafter, or when AFP or PIVKA-II levels were elevated. Recurrence was diagnosed based on typical imaging findings on CT scans.

Surgical techniques. Our standard skin incision technique is a median abdominal incision and a right transverse abdominal incision extending from the lower edge of the median abdominal skin incision to the mid-axillary line (the so-called inverted L-shaped incision) (7). When we removed the tumour thrombus from the suprahepatic inferior vena cava, we added a median sternotomy extension of the inverted L-shaped incision, which has been described in detail elsewhere (15). In patients with a particularly large right lobe tumour, we used the anterior approach, wherein parenchymal transection was performed without earlier mobilisation of the liver and extrahepatic control of the right hepatic veins (16). In almost all hepatic resections, Pringle’s manoeuvre or hemivascular occlusion was applied. In all primary cases, intraoperative cholangiography and bile leakage tests were routinely performed. Drains were placed in all cases and removed when the drainage was serous and not stained with bile, usually around postoperative day 2.

Statistical analysis. All variables are expressed as means±standard deviation or medians with ranges, and they were compared using the Mann–Whitney U-test. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were calculated using the Kaplan– Meier method, and differences between groups were compared using the log-rank test. Multivariate analysis was conducted using a Cox proportional hazards model with stepwise selection of variables. All statistical analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics software package (version 26.0 for Windows; IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Statistical significance was set at a p<0.05.

Results

Comparison of clinicopathological findings between large and huge HCC groups. In total, 115 patients with large HCC and 92 with huge HCC underwent liver resection. We compared the clinicopathological findings between the two groups (Table I). The patients in the huge HCC group were significantly younger than those in the large HCC group (p=0.028). The sex ratio, serum albumin, serum total bilirubin, ICG retention ratio at 15 min, hepatitis B virus (HBV) positive ratio, number of non-B non-C patients, Child–Pugh class, background liver status, tumour differentiation status, rate of macroscopic portal vein invasion, number of ruptured tumours, rate of reductive hepatic resections, rate of adjuvant HAIC, incidence of complications, 30-day mortality rate, and hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups. The platelet count was significantly higher in the huge group than in the large group (p<0.001). The prothrombin time-international normalised ratio was significantly higher in the huge group than in the large group (p=0.007). Serum AFP and PIVKA-II levels were significantly higher in the huge group compared to the large group (p=0.001, p<0.001). Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive patients were significantly fewer in the huge HCC group than in the large HCC group (p=0.023). The number of tumours (p=0.002), rate of major hepatic vein invasion (p<0.001), rate of noncurative resection (p<0.001), operation time and blood loss (p<0.001), and 90-day mortality rate (p=0.037) were significantly higher in the huge HCC group compared to the large group.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Comparison of clinicopathological findings between the large and huge Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) groups.

Overall survival and DFS according to tumour size. The median follow-up period was 17.3 months (range=0.3-184.5 months) in the large HCC group and 30.6 months (range=2.4-195.1 months) in the huge HCC group. The overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 87.2%, 59.3%, and 45.7%, respectively, in the large HCC group and 68.8%, 44.2%, and 33.9%, respectively, in the huge HCC group. MST was 72.4 and 61.3 months in the large and huge HCC groups, respectively. Overall survival was significantly worse in the huge HCC group than in the large HCC group (p=0.035; Figure 1a).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

(a) Overall survival rates after resection between the large and huge groups: patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (solid line) and patients with huge HCC (dotted line). The difference in survival rates was significant (p=0.035). (b) Disease-free survival rates after resection between the large and huge groups: patients with large HCC (solid line) and patients with huge HCC (dotted line). The difference in survival rates was significant (p=0.002).

The DFS rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 55.7%, 31.3%, and 22.3%, respectively, in the large HCC group and 36.9%, 19.5%, and 12.0%, respectively, in the huge HCC group. The DFS rate was significantly worse in the huge HCC group than in the large HCC group (p=0.002; Figure 1b).

Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis predicting overall survival. The clinical and histopathological characteristics of the 92 patients in the huge HCC group are summarised in Table II. Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that liver cirrhosis, multiple liver tumours (≥4), poor histological grade, and main portal vein invasion were independent prognostic factors for overall survival.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Univariate and multivariate analysis predicting overall survival for huge hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Overall survival for patients according to the presence of four prognostic factors. Figure 2 shows the cumulative survival rates according to the presence of four prognostic factors. The cumulative overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 92.4%, 73.5%, and 58.4%, respectively, for patients without all four prognostic factors, with MST of 71.7 months. For patients with one prognostic factor, these rates were 69.0%, 32.1%, and 22.0%, respectively, with MST of 41.0 months. For patients with two or more prognostic factors, these rates were 11.8%, 0%, and 0%, respectively, with MST of 8.2 months. Thus, the cumulative overall survival was significantly worse for HCC patients with two or more prognostic factors than for those without any prognostic factor (p<0.001) or one prognostic factor (p=0.001).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Overall survival rates of patients with a huge hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), divided based on the presence of four prognostic factors: patients with 0 prognostic factors (solid line), patients with 1 prognostic factor (dotted line), and patients with 2 or more prognostic factors (dot-dash line). Each of the three groups is significantly different from the others (p≤0.001).

Discussion

In this study, we retrospectively compared the clinical features, OS rates, and DFS rates between the huge (≥10 cm) and large (5-10 cm) HCC groups. Patients with multiple tumours (≥4), major hepatic vein invasion, and noncurative resection were significantly more frequent in the large HCC group. AFP and PIVKA-II levels were significantly higher in the huge HCC group than in the large HCC group, whereas OS and DFS were significantly worse in the huge HCC group than in the large group. These results agree with those of previous reports (7, 17, 18). In contrast, some studies have reported no significant differences in OS or DFS between patients with large HCC and those with huge HCC because of improvements in surgical techniques and multidisciplinary treatment (11, 19). Furthermore, Alleman et al. have reported that median survival and 5-year survival were better for patients with huge HCC than for those with large HCC, possibly because of less aggressive tumour biology (20). However, a recent meta-analysis reported that 5-year survival was worse for HCC patients than for non-HCC patients, and the authors confirmed the benefits and feasibility of hepatectomy for HCC (21). Although these results remain controversial, select patients with huge HCC may be candidates for hepatectomy, similar to patients with large HCC.

Of late, liver resection for huge HCC has been reported to be safe. The estimated blood loss reportedly ranges from 480 to 4354.1 ml, with morbidity rates of 10.9%-72.7% and surgery-related mortality rates of 0%-11.1% (7, 9, 11, 16-18, 22-27). In a recent meta-analysis, the rates of treatment-related complications and mortality were reported to be 42.7% and 4.2%, respectively (21). Wang et al. reported no significant differences in the rates of treatment-related complications and mortality between huge HCC and non-huge HCC groups (21). Furthermore, Zhu et al. reported that severe complications were not more frequent after liver resection than after local regional therapy such as TACE for huge HCC (28). In our series, the estimated blood loss was 2440.0 mL, the morbidity rate was 20.7%, and the mortality rate was 1.1%. With regard to the 30-day mortality, one patient died on postoperative day 10 because of post-hepatectomy liver failure following massive postoperative bleeding from a hepatic artery aneurysm. Although the estimated blood loss was significantly higher and the operation time was significantly longer in the huge HCC group than in the large HCC group, there was no significant difference in morbidity and 30-day mortality between the huge and large HCC groups. Accordingly, hepatic resection for patients with huge HCC may be a safe treatment modality with low mortality and morbidity rates, similar to those for patients with large HCC.

Surgical indications for HCC with four or more intrahepatic metastases remain controversial, and we aggressively performed liver resection for large or huge HCCs with four or more intrahepatic metastases if all tumours could be eliminated. Moreover, we have performed reductive hepatic resection for large or huge main tumours followed by HAIC or TACE for residual tumours in cases where all tumours could not be eliminated by liver resection (13). According to the clinical practice guidelines for HCC in Japan (29), TACE, HAIC, or molecularly targeted therapy is recommended. However, large HCCs are frequently accompanied by multiple tumours. In our series, 31.5% of the huge HCC patients had ≥4 intrahepatic metastases. Generally, these cases are contraindicated for surgery because of poor long-term outcomes. However, several authors have performed reductive hepatic resection in combination with multidisciplinary treatment for huge HCC with multiple intrahepatic metastases (30-34). Inoue et al. (31) have reported the usefulness of reduction surgery followed by repeated TACE for patients with huge HCC and multiple intrahepatic metastases when the patients had good liver function, and the total volume of metastatic nodules was <10% of the remnant liver parenchyma. Moreover, we revealed the usefulness of reduction surgery followed by HAIC (13). In our previous report, the overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years after reduction surgery were 73.2%, 38.7%, and 38.7%, respectively, although that study included non-huge HCC. In the present study, reductive hepatic resection was not a negative predictive factor for OS in multivariate analysis for large HCCs. These results may be attributed to the multidisciplinary treatment of residual tumours. Therefore, reduction surgery followed by multidisciplinary treatment such as TACE and HAIC may offer the possibility of long-term survival for select patients with huge HCC accompanied by multiple intrahepatic metastases.

There is currently no effective neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for HCC; however, some authors have recommended perioperative therapy for huge HCCs (35, 36). Hwang et al. (36) strongly recommended transarterial chemoinfusion or TACE for huge HCC with satellite nodules at 1 month after surgery. We performed adjuvant HAIC for HCC patients with portal vein invasion or intrahepatic metastases after surgery from 2000 to 2013 (14). Therefore, in the present study, 17.4% of the large HCC patients received adjuvant HAIC. Our previous study (14) has suggested that adjuvant HAIC reduces the number of recurrent nodules in the remnant liver; therefore, it may also be useful for curatively resected huge HCC with intrahepatic metastases.

In the huge HCC group, we experienced early mortality due to recurrence of HCC after surgery, and such cases are not appropriate candidates for hepatic resection. The 90-day mortality rate for huge HCC was 7.6%, which was significantly higher than that for large HCC (1.7%, p=0.037). In the huge HCC group, we experienced seven cases of 90-day mortality, including one case of 30-day mortality. Six of the seven patients died of HCC, and five of these six patients were discharged after surgery and could visit the hospital as outpatients, whereas one could not be discharged because of liver dysfunction due to intrahepatic multiple recurrences of HCC. Two of the six patients underwent noncurative resection, and small intrahepatic metastases remained in the remnant liver. The other four patients showed early multiple recurrences in the remnant liver. In all six cases, the tumours showed rapid growth after surgery, and we could not perform any treatment because of poor liver function. Therefore, surgery should be avoided in patients with rapidly growing tumours or patients whose liver function is not expected to improve sufficiently after surgery.

Liver cirrhosis, multiple intrahepatic metastases (≥4), poor histological grade, and macroscopic portal vein invasion were found to be prognostic factors for OS in this study, and it is suggested that patients with two or more of these prognostic factors are not appropriate candidates for hepatic resection. Major portal vein invasion, multiple intrahepatic metastases (≥4), and poor histological grade have previously been recognised as poor prognostic factors after liver resection for patients with huge HCC (9, 17, 36-38). Some papers have described the usefulness of prognostic nomograms for postoperative recurrence and mortality for patients with huge HCC and reported that vascular invasion and histological grade were prognostic factors of huge HCC (39, 40). Furthermore, cirrhosis has been reported as a poor prognostic factor for patients with huge HCC (17, 41); in patients with cirrhosis, liver regeneration after hepatectomy is significantly slower and less complete (42). Therefore, treatment may be delayed or impossible when early recurrence occurs after liver resection in patients with cirrhosis. In the present study, the overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years for patients without any risk factor were 96.4%, 74.3%, and 69.0%, respectively, with MST of 71.7 months. For patients with one risk factor, these rates were 79.9%, 46.1%, and 29.6%, with MST of 41.0 months. These results are acceptable when compared with results from other institutes (9, 10, 18,19, 21-23, 27, 36, 37, 43). However, the overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years for patients with two or more risk factors were 11.8%, 0%, and 0%, respectively, with MST of 8.2 months. These results suggest that patients with two or more adverse predictors have rapid tumour growth or insufficient improvement in liver function after surgery; therefore, they are not appropriate candidates for hepatic resection.

TACE, HAIC, and molecularly targeted therapy have been reported as alternative treatment options for unresectable HCC. The overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years for patients with huge HCC with multiple intrahepatic metastases (≥4) were 33.3%, 11.1%, and 0%, respectively (44), whereas those for patients with huge unresectable HCC at 1 and 2 years were 29% and 14%, respectively (45). These results are not satisfactory but may be superior to the results for surgical resection in patients with two or more prognostic factors. Recently, the usefulness of atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab for patients with unresectable HCC has been reported (46). The trial included patients with macrovascular invasion of the main portal trunk or the portal vein branch contralateral to the primarily involved lobe, bile duct invasion, or at least 50% hepatic involvement (or any combination of these three features) (46). Therefore, atezolizumab combined with bevacizumab may be effective in patients with two or more prognostic factors. If these treatments eliminate the poor prognostic factors and allow hepatic resection, even huge HCCs with two or more prognostic factors may be good candidates for surgical resection. Taking all points into consideration, huge HCCs with two or three prognostic factors are considered borderline resectable tumours. These patients may be candidates for neoadjuvant treatment before surgical resection.

This study had several limitations. First, as with any retrospective study, selection bias was inevitable. Second, the number of patients was small, and all patients were treated at a single institution. Third, the study did not evaluate some important preoperative variables; therefore, multicentre studies should be conducted. Finally, because of the long period of patient recruitment, the treatment for recurrence and adjuvant therapy may have differed depending on the period, and the types of treatment available may have affected the prognosis.

In conclusion, hepatic resection can be performed safely and effectively for select HCCs measuring ≥10 cm in diameter. We identified four adverse predictors of survival: liver cirrhosis, multiple intrahepatic metastases (≥4), poor histological grade, and major portal vein invasion. Our findings suggest that patients with huge HCC accompanied by two or more of these adverse predictors are not appropriate candidates for straightforward hepatic resection.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr. Gakuryu Nakayama and Dr. Keiichi Yazawa for their assistance with this study.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    TK drafted this manuscript. TK, KT, and YS were the main surgeons. RM, KS, MD, S-CL, YY, YH, and IE assisted during the surgery. KS, S-CL, and IE reviewed and modified the manuscript. All Authors read and approved the final manuscript.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

  • Received December 7, 2021.
  • Revision received March 11, 2022.
  • Accepted March 14, 2022.
  • Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 international license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).

References

  1. ↵
    1. GBD 2015 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators
    : Global, regional, and national life expectancy, all-cause mortality, and cause-specific mortality for 249 causes of death, 1980-2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet 388(10053): 1459-1544, 2016. PMID: 27733281. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31012-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Kudo M
    : Surveillance, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome of liver cancer in Japan. Liver Cancer 4(1): 39-50, 2015. PMID: 26020028. DOI: 10.1159/000367727
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Ito K,
    2. Takemura N,
    3. Inagaki F,
    4. Mihara F and
    5. Kokudo N
    : Difference in treatment algorithms for hepatocellular carcinoma between world’s principal guidelines. Glob Health Med 2(5): 282-291, 2020. PMID: 33330822. DOI: 10.35772/ghm.2020.01066
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Hsu HC,
    2. Sheu JC,
    3. Lin YH,
    4. Chen DS,
    5. Lee CS,
    6. Hwang LY and
    7. Beasley RP
    : Prognostic histologic features of resected small hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in Taiwan. A comparison with resected large HCC. Cancer 56(3): 672-680, 1985. PMID: 2988752. DOI: 10.1002/1097-0142(19850801)56:3<672::aid-cncr2820560340>3.0.co;2-v
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Adachi E,
    2. Maeda T,
    3. Kajiyama K,
    4. Kinukawa N,
    5. Matsumata T,
    6. Sugimachi K and
    7. Tsuneyoshi M
    : Factors correlated with portal venous invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma: univariate and multivariate analyses of 232 resected cases without preoperative treatments. Cancer 77(10): 2022-2031, 1996. PMID: 8640665. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960515)77:10<2022::AID-CNCR9>3.0.CO;2-S
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Jwo SC,
    2. Chiu JH,
    3. Chau GY,
    4. Loong CC and
    5. Lui WY
    : Risk factors linked to tumor recurrence of human hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatic resection. Hepatology 16(6): 1367-1371, 1992. PMID: 1332922. DOI: 10.1002/hep.1840160611
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Nagano Y,
    2. Tanaka K,
    3. Togo S,
    4. Matsuo K,
    5. Kunisaki C,
    6. Sugita M,
    7. Morioka D,
    8. Miura Y,
    9. Kubota T,
    10. Endo I,
    11. Sekido H and
    12. Shimada H
    : Efficacy of hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinomas larger than 10 cm. World J Surg 29(1): 66-71, 2005. PMID: 15599739. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-004-7509-y
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Nagasue N,
    2. Kohno H,
    3. Chang YC,
    4. Taniura H,
    5. Yamanoi A,
    6. Uchida M,
    7. Kimoto T,
    8. Takemoto Y,
    9. Nakamura T and
    10. Yukaya H
    : Liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Results of 229 consecutive patients during 11 years. Ann Surg 217(4): 375-384, 1993. PMID: 8385442. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199304000-00009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Liau KH,
    2. Ruo L,
    3. Shia J,
    4. Padela A,
    5. Gonen M,
    6. Jarnagin WR,
    7. Fong Y,
    8. D’Angelica MI,
    9. Blumgart LH and
    10. DeMatteo RP
    : Outcome of partial hepatectomy for large (> 10 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer 104(9): 1948-1955, 2005. PMID: 16196045. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.21415
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Yamashita Y,
    2. Taketomi A,
    3. Shirabe K,
    4. Aishima S,
    5. Tsuijita E,
    6. Morita K,
    7. Kayashima H and
    8. Maehara Y
    : Outcomes of hepatic resection for huge hepatocellular carcinoma (≥ 10 cm in diameter). J Surg Oncol 104(3): 292-298, 2011. PMID: 21465490. DOI: 10.1002/jso.21931
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Fang Q,
    2. Xie QS,
    3. Chen JM,
    4. Shan SL,
    5. Xie K,
    6. Geng XP and
    7. Liu FB
    : Long-term outcomes after hepatectomy of huge hepatocellular carcinoma: A single-center experience in China. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 18(6): 532-537, 2019. PMID: 31543313. DOI: 10.1016/j.hbpd.2019.09.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Yamanaka N,
    2. Okamoto E,
    3. Kuwata K and
    4. Tanaka N
    : A multiple regression equation for prediction of posthepatectomy liver failure. Ann Surg 200(5): 658-663, 1984. PMID: 6486915. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-198411000-00018
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Tanaka K,
    2. Yabushita Y,
    3. Nakagawa K,
    4. Kumamoto T,
    5. Matsuo K,
    6. Taguri M and
    7. Endo I
    : Debulking surgery followed by intraarterial 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy plus subcutaneous interferon alfa for massive hepatocellular carcinoma with multiple intrahepatic metastases: a pilot study. Eur J Surg Oncol 39(12): 1364-1370, 2013. PMID: 24183169. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2013.10.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Kumamoto T,
    2. Tanaka K,
    3. Matsuo K,
    4. Takeda K,
    5. Nojiri K,
    6. Mori R,
    7. Taniguchi K,
    8. Matsuyama R,
    9. Ueda M,
    10. Akiyama H,
    11. Ichikawa Y,
    12. Ota M and
    13. Endo I
    : Adjuvant hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy with 5-Fluorouracil and interferon after curative resection of hepatocellular carcinoma: a preliminary report. Anticancer Res 33(12): 5585-5590, 2013. PMID: 24324102.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Miller DR
    : Median sternotomy extension of abdominal incision for hepatic lobectomy. Ann Surg 175(2): 193-196, 1972. PMID: 5059604. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-197202000-00006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Liu CL,
    2. Fan ST,
    3. Lo CM,
    4. Tung-Ping Poon R and
    5. Wong J
    : Anterior approach for major right hepatic resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg 232(1): 25-31, 2000. PMID: 10862191. DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200007000-00004
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Taniai N,
    2. Yoshida H and
    3. Tajiri T
    : Adaptation of hepatectomy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 15(4): 410-416, 2008. PMID: 18670843. DOI: 10.1007/s00534-007-1317-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Wakayama K,
    2. Kamiyama T,
    3. Yokoo H,
    4. Orimo T,
    5. Shimada S,
    6. Einama T,
    7. Kamachi H and
    8. Taketomi A
    : Huge hepatocellular carcinoma greater than 10 cm in diameter worsens prognosis by causing distant recurrence after curative resection. J Surg Oncol 115(3): 324-329, 2017. PMID: 28192617. DOI: 10.1002/jso.24501
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Yang J,
    2. Li C,
    3. Wen TF,
    4. Yan LN,
    5. Li B,
    6. Wang WT,
    7. Yang JY and
    8. Xu MQ
    : Is hepatectomy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma (≥ 10 cm in diameter) safe and effective? A single-center experience. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 15(17): 7069-7077, 2014. PMID: 25227793. DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.17.7069
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Allemann P,
    2. Demartines N,
    3. Bouzourene H,
    4. Tempia A and
    5. Halkic N
    : Long-term outcome after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 10 cm. World J Surg 37(2): 452-458, 2013. PMID: 23188527. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-012-1840-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Wang L,
    2. Liu Z,
    3. Liu X,
    4. Zeng Y and
    5. Liu J
    : The hepatectomy efficacy of huge hepatocellular carcinoma and its risk factors: A meta analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 96(52): e9226, 2017. PMID: 29384907. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009226
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Zhou YM,
    2. Li B,
    3. Xu DH and
    4. Yang JM
    : Safety and efficacy of partial hepatectomy for huge (≥10 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review. Med Sci Monit 17(3): RA76-RA83, 2011. PMID: 21358616. DOI: 10.12659/msm.881443
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Yeh CN,
    2. Lee WC and
    3. Chen MF
    : Hepatic resection and prognosis for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 10 cm: two decades of experience at Chang Gung memorial hospital. Ann Surg Oncol 10(9): 1070-1076, 2003. PMID: 14597446. DOI: 10.1245/aso.2003.03.072
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Poon RT,
    2. Fan ST and
    3. Wong J
    : Selection criteria for hepatic resection in patients with large hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 10 cm in diameter. J Am Coll Surg 194(5): 592-602, 2002. PMID: 12022599. DOI: 10.1016/s1072-7515(02)01163-8
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Pawlik TM,
    2. Poon RT,
    3. Abdalla EK,
    4. Zorzi D,
    5. Ikai I,
    6. Curley SA,
    7. Nagorney DM,
    8. Belghiti J,
    9. Ng IO,
    10. Yamaoka Y,
    11. Lauwers GY,
    12. Vauthey JN and International Cooperative Study Group on Hepatocellular Carcinoma
    : Critical appraisal of the clinical and pathologic predictors of survival after resection of large hepatocellular carcinoma. Arch Surg 140(5): 450-7; discussion 457-8, 2005. PMID: 15897440. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.140.5.450
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Mok KT,
    2. Wang BW,
    3. Lo GH,
    4. Liang HL,
    5. Liu SI,
    6. Chou NH,
    7. Tsai CC,
    8. Chen IS,
    9. Yeh MH and
    10. Chen YC
    : Multimodality management of hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 10 cm. J Am Coll Surg 197(5): 730-738, 2003. PMID: 14585406. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.07.013
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Chen XP,
    2. Qiu FZ,
    3. Wu ZD and
    4. Zhang BX
    : Chinese experience with hepatectomy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma. Br J Surg 91(3): 322-326, 2004. PMID: 14991633. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4413
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Zhu SL,
    2. Zhong JH,
    3. Ke Y,
    4. Ma L,
    5. You XM and
    6. Li LQ
    : Efficacy of hepatic resection vs. transarterial chemoembolization for solitary huge hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 21(32): 9630-9637, 2015. PMID: 26327771. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i32.9630
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Kokudo N,
    2. Takemura N,
    3. Hasegawa K,
    4. Takayama T,
    5. Kubo S,
    6. Shimada M,
    7. Nagano H,
    8. Hatano E,
    9. Izumi N,
    10. Kaneko S,
    11. Kudo M,
    12. Iijima H,
    13. Genda T,
    14. Tateishi R,
    15. Torimura T,
    16. Igaki H,
    17. Kobayashi S,
    18. Sakurai H,
    19. Murakami T,
    20. Watadani T and
    21. Matsuyama Y
    : Clinical practice guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma: The Japan Society of Hepatology 2017 (4th JSH-HCC guidelines) 2019 update. Hepatol Res 49(10): 1109-1113, 2019. PMID: 31336394. DOI: 10.1111/hepr.13411
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. He C,
    2. Zhou Z,
    3. Xiao Z and
    4. Wang J
    : Treatment strategy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma with intrahepatic metastasis and macrovascular invasion: a case report and literature review. J Cancer Res Ther 14(Supplement): S1233-S1236, 2018. PMID: 30539879. DOI: 10.4103/0973-1482.204845
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Inoue K,
    2. Nakamura T,
    3. Kinoshita T,
    4. Konishi M,
    5. Nakagohri T,
    6. Oda T,
    7. Takahashi S,
    8. Gotohda N,
    9. Hayashi T and
    10. Nawano S
    : Volume reduction surgery for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 130(6): 362-366, 2004. PMID: 15034789. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-004-0566-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Wakabayashi H,
    2. Ushiyama T,
    3. Ishimura K,
    4. Izuishi K,
    5. Karasawa Y,
    6. Masaki T,
    7. Watanabe S,
    8. Kuriyama S and
    9. Maeta H
    : Significance of reduction surgery in multidisciplinary treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with multiple intrahepatic lesions. J Surg Oncol 82(2): 98-103, 2003. PMID: 12561065. DOI: 10.1002/jso.10203
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Yamamoto K,
    2. Takenaka K,
    3. Kawahara N,
    4. Shimada M,
    5. Shirabe K,
    6. Itasaka H,
    7. Nishizaki T,
    8. Yanaga K and
    9. Sugimachi K
    : Indications for palliative reduction surgery in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The use of a remnant tumor index. Arch Surg 132(2): 120-123, 1997. PMID: 9041912. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.1997.01430260018002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Yasuda S,
    2. Nomi T,
    3. Hokuto D,
    4. Yamato I,
    5. Obara S,
    6. Yamada T,
    7. Kanehiro H and
    8. Nakajima Y
    : Huge hepatocellular carcinoma with multiple intrahepatic metastases: An aggressive multimodal treatment. Int J Surg Case Rep 16: 44-47, 2015. PMID: 26413921. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijscr.2015.09.016
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Obara S,
    2. Nomi T,
    3. Yamato I,
    4. Hokuto D,
    5. Yasuda S,
    6. Kawaguchi C,
    7. Yoshikawa T,
    8. Sho M,
    9. Yamada T,
    10. Akahori T,
    11. Kinoshita S,
    12. Nagai M,
    13. Kanehiro H and
    14. Nakajima Y
    : [Huge hepatocellular carcinoma with portal vein and inferior vena cava thrombi treated with curative liver resection and perioperative hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy - a case report]. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 43(12): 1779-1781, 2016. PMID: 28133129.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Hwang S,
    2. Lee YJ,
    3. Kim KH,
    4. Ahn CS,
    5. Moon DB,
    6. Ha TY,
    7. Song GW,
    8. Jung DH and
    9. Lee SG
    : Long-term outcome after resection of huge hepatocellular carcinoma ≥ 10 cm: single-institution experience with 471 patients. World J Surg 39(10): 2519-2528, 2015. PMID: 26126423. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-015-3129-y
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Jo S
    : Outcome of hepatectomy for huge hepatocellular carcinoma. Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 15(2): 90-100, 2011. PMID: 26421023. DOI: 10.14701/kjhbps.2011.15.2.90
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Huang X,
    2. Wei W,
    3. Ya N,
    4. Zeng J,
    5. Zeng Y,
    6. Ma C,
    7. Chi M,
    8. Wu Y,
    9. Li Y,
    10. Huang Y,
    11. Zhang X,
    12. Huang A and
    13. Liu J
    : A mathematical model to predict short-term recurrence and metastasis of primary hepatocellular carcinoma larger than 10 cm in diameter. Hepatogastroenterology 60(122): 225-230, 2013. PMID: 23574650. DOI: 10.5754/hge
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Wang JC,
    2. Hou JY,
    3. Chen JC,
    4. Xiang CL,
    5. Mao XH,
    6. Yang B,
    7. Li Q,
    8. Liu QB,
    9. Chen J,
    10. Ye ZW,
    11. Peng W,
    12. Sun XQ,
    13. Chen MS,
    14. Zhou QF and
    15. Zhang YJ
    : Development and validation of prognostic nomograms for single large and huge hepatocellular carcinoma after curative resection. Eur J Cancer 155: 85-96, 2021. PMID: 34371445. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.07.009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Wang XH,
    2. Liu QB,
    3. Xiang CL,
    4. Mao XH,
    5. Yang B,
    6. Li Q,
    7. Zhou QF,
    8. Li SQ,
    9. Zhou ZG and
    10. Chen MS
    : Multi-institutional validation of novel models for predicting the prognosis of patients with huge hepatocellular carcinoma. Int J Cancer 149(1): 127-138, 2021. PMID: 33586134. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.33516
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Abdel-Wahab M,
    2. Sultan A,
    3. el-Ghawalby A,
    4. Fathy O,
    5. el-Ebidy G,
    6. Abo-Zeid M,
    7. Aboel-Enin A,
    8. Abdallah T,
    9. Fouad A,
    10. el-Fiky A,
    11. Gadel-Hak N and
    12. Ezzat F
    : Is resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic patients beneficial? Study of 38 cases. Hepatogastroenterology 48(39): 757-761, 2001. PMID: 11462920.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Aierken Y,
    2. Kong LX,
    3. Li B,
    4. Liu XJ,
    5. Lu S and
    6. Yang JY
    : Liver fibrosis is a major risk factor for liver regeneration: A comparison between healthy and fibrotic liver. Medicine (Baltimore) 99(22): e20003, 2020. PMID: 32481371. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000020003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Zhu SL,
    2. Chen J,
    3. Li H,
    4. Li LQ and
    5. Zhong JH
    : Efficacy of hepatic resection for huge (≥ 10 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma: good prognosis associated with the uninodular subtype. Int J Clin Exp Med 8(11): 20581-20588, 2015. PMID: 26884976.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Miyayama S,
    2. Kikuchi Y,
    3. Yoshida M,
    4. Yamashiro M,
    5. Sugimori N,
    6. Ikeda R,
    7. Okimura K,
    8. Sakuragawa N,
    9. Ueda T,
    10. Sanada T,
    11. Watanabe H and
    12. Notsumata K
    : Outcomes of conventional transarterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma ≥10 cm. Hepatol Res 49(7): 787-798, 2019. PMID: 30907468. DOI: 10.1111/hepr.13335
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Tsai WL,
    2. Lai KH,
    3. Liang HL,
    4. Hsu PI,
    5. Chan HH,
    6. Chen WC,
    7. Yu HC,
    8. Tsay FW,
    9. Wang HM,
    10. Tsai HC and
    11. Cheng JS
    : Hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy for patients with huge unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. PLoS One 9(5): e92784, 2014. PMID: 24824520. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092784
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Finn RS,
    2. Qin S,
    3. Ikeda M,
    4. Galle PR,
    5. Ducreux M,
    6. Kim TY,
    7. Kudo M,
    8. Breder V,
    9. Merle P,
    10. Kaseb AO,
    11. Li D,
    12. Verret W,
    13. Xu DZ,
    14. Hernandez S,
    15. Liu J,
    16. Huang C,
    17. Mulla S,
    18. Wang Y,
    19. Lim HY,
    20. Zhu AX,
    21. Cheng AL and IMbrave150 Investigators
    : Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 382(20): 1894-1905, 2020. PMID: 32402160. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1915745
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 42 (5)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 42, Issue 5
May 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Surgical Indications for Huge Hepatocellular Carcinoma
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
5 + 1 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Surgical Indications for Huge Hepatocellular Carcinoma
TAKAFUMI KUMAMOTO, RYUSEI MATSUYAMA, KAZUHISA TAKEDA, YU SAWADA, KOTA SAHARA, DAISUKE MORIOKA, SHAO-CIAO LUO, YASUHIRO YABUSHITA, YUKI HOMMA, ITARU ENDO
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2573-2581; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15735

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Surgical Indications for Huge Hepatocellular Carcinoma
TAKAFUMI KUMAMOTO, RYUSEI MATSUYAMA, KAZUHISA TAKEDA, YU SAWADA, KOTA SAHARA, DAISUKE MORIOKA, SHAO-CIAO LUO, YASUHIRO YABUSHITA, YUKI HOMMA, ITARU ENDO
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2573-2581; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15735
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Glasgow Prognostic Score Predicts Survival and Recurrence Pattern in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Hepatectomy
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Tumor Budding Grade and T Stage as Recurrence Predictors of High-risk Stage II Colorectal Cancer
  • Pathologic Complete Response (pCR) in Patient With Myxofibrosarcoma Who Underwent Neoadjuvant Radiation Concurrent to Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Machine Learning Model to Guide Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy in Febrile Neutropenic Patients With Hematologic Malignancies
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • liver resection
  • mortality
  • recurrence
  • surgery
Anticancer Research

© 2025 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire