File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Survival analysis of patients with transplantable recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: Implications for salvage liver transplant

TitleSurvival analysis of patients with transplantable recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: Implications for salvage liver transplant
Authors
Issue Date2008
PublisherAmerican Medical Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.archsurg.com
Citation
Archives Of Surgery, 2008, v. 143 n. 1, p. 68-74 How to Cite?
AbstractHypothesis: There is no difference in the survival benefit between salvage liver transplant and nontransplant therapies for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Patients: Sixty patients developed transplantable intrahepatic recurrent HCC after curative resection. Twelve patients received salvage liver transplant, whereas 48 received nontransplant therapies, including a second surgical resection, radiofrequency ablation, transarterial chemoembolization, and percutaneous ethanol injection. Main Outcome Measures: The overall survival rates were compared between the 2 groups. Clinicopathologic variables were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses for their influence on overall survival. Results: There was no significant difference in overall survival rates between the salvage transplant and nontransplant groups. In the nontransplant group, pTNM (pathologic TNM) staging at primary resection and the time from primary resection to tumor recurrence were identified as independent prognostic factors affecting overall survival. These 2 factors carried no prognostic value in the salvage transplant group. Patients in the salvage transplant group with stage II tumors before the primary resection or intrahepatic recurrence within 12 months of the primary resection had significantly better overall survival than did the nontransplant group with corresponding poor prognostic factors. Conclusions: Patients with transplantable intrahepatic recurrence can be treated effectively by salvage transplant or nontransplant therapies. Salvage transplant may be more beneficial to patients with stage II tumors before the primary resection and those with early intrahepatic recurrence. © 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/84013
ISSN
2014 Impact Factor: 4.926
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNg, KKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChung, MLen_HK
dc.contributor.authorChi, LLen_HK
dc.contributor.authorPoon, RTPen_HK
dc.contributor.authorSee, CCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorSheung, TFen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T08:47:53Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T08:47:53Z-
dc.date.issued2008en_HK
dc.identifier.citationArchives Of Surgery, 2008, v. 143 n. 1, p. 68-74en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0004-0010en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/84013-
dc.description.abstractHypothesis: There is no difference in the survival benefit between salvage liver transplant and nontransplant therapies for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Design: Retrospective study. Setting: Tertiary referral center. Patients: Sixty patients developed transplantable intrahepatic recurrent HCC after curative resection. Twelve patients received salvage liver transplant, whereas 48 received nontransplant therapies, including a second surgical resection, radiofrequency ablation, transarterial chemoembolization, and percutaneous ethanol injection. Main Outcome Measures: The overall survival rates were compared between the 2 groups. Clinicopathologic variables were evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses for their influence on overall survival. Results: There was no significant difference in overall survival rates between the salvage transplant and nontransplant groups. In the nontransplant group, pTNM (pathologic TNM) staging at primary resection and the time from primary resection to tumor recurrence were identified as independent prognostic factors affecting overall survival. These 2 factors carried no prognostic value in the salvage transplant group. Patients in the salvage transplant group with stage II tumors before the primary resection or intrahepatic recurrence within 12 months of the primary resection had significantly better overall survival than did the nontransplant group with corresponding poor prognostic factors. Conclusions: Patients with transplantable intrahepatic recurrence can be treated effectively by salvage transplant or nontransplant therapies. Salvage transplant may be more beneficial to patients with stage II tumors before the primary resection and those with early intrahepatic recurrence. © 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherAmerican Medical Association. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.archsurg.comen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofArchives of Surgeryen_HK
dc.subject.meshCarcinoma, Hepatocellular - mortality - pathology - surgery-
dc.subject.meshCatheter Ablation - methods-
dc.subject.meshLiver Transplantation - methods - mortality-
dc.subject.meshNeoplasm Recurrence, Local - mortality - pathology - surgery-
dc.subject.meshSalvage Therapy-
dc.titleSurvival analysis of patients with transplantable recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma: Implications for salvage liver transplanten_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0004-0010&volume=143&issue=1&spage=68&epage=74&date=2008&atitle=Survival+analysis+of+patients+with+transplantable+recurrent+hepatocellular+carcinoma:+implications+for+salvage+liver+transplanten_HK
dc.identifier.emailPoon, RTP: poontp@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailSee, CC: chanlsc@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityPoon, RTP=rp00446en_HK
dc.identifier.authoritySee, CC=rp01568en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1001/archsurg.2007.15en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid18209155-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-38549098374en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros141782en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-38549098374&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume143en_HK
dc.identifier.issue1en_HK
dc.identifier.spage68en_HK
dc.identifier.epage74en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000252438500017-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNg, KK=35248894000en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChung, ML=8696033300en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChi, LL=7409789712en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridPoon, RTP=7103097223en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSee, CC=7404255575en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSheung, TF=6506234707en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats