Anatomic versus non-anatomic resection of hepatocellular carcinoma with microvascular invasion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

The efficacy of anatomical resection (AR) and non-anatomical resection (NR) in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with microvascular invasion (MVI) remains unknown. This study compared the safety and outcomes of these surgical procedures. A systematic literature search was conducted. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS). Overall hazard ratio (HR) was calculated from Kaplan-Meier plots and outcomes using random-effects models. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the AR and NR groups (risk ratio [RR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-1.17, p = 0.496). OS was higher with AR at 1 year (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45-0.98, p = 0.037), 3 years (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.50-0.82, p = 0.000), and 5 years (RR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.65-0.89, p = 0.001). AR was associated with a higher OS rate (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47-0.82, p = 0.001). AR was associated with improved DFS at 1 year (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.82, p = 0.000), 3 years (RR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.86, p = 0.000), and 5 years (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.94, p = 0.002). Compared with NR, AR had significant advantages on overall HR of DFS (HR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.91, p = 0.012). In conclusion, AR was associated with higher rates of OS and DFS in HCC patients with MVI. Thus, for well-presented liver function HCC patients which are predicted to have positive MVI, AR is recommended.

Keywords: Anatomic resection; Hepatocellular carcinoma; Microvascular invasion.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Taiwan LLC.