A study of 254 patients with non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcino

A study of 254 patients with non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma (LF116474 level 2b) also showed no difference in postoperative results between major resection Selleck LEE011 (three or more Couinaud’s segments) and limited resection (two or fewer Couinaud’s segments). In a study of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma 5 cm or less in diameter including those with cirrhosis (LF008852 level 2b), the operative procedures (lobectomy: n = 43 vs. limited resection: n = 89) had no effect on postoperative survival.

A study of only hepatocellular carcinoma patients with cirrhosis (LF009923 level 2a) also showed no difference in mortality or postoperative survival. From these viewpoints, major resection has minor significance for hepatocellular carcinoma regardless of whether the liver is non-cirrhotic or cirrhotic at present.

Limited resection may be appropriate if curative resection is feasible in consideration of liver function and tumor size. Nonetheless, all past reports are on retrospective studies, with no reports describing prospective studies concerning the selection of operative procedures. In addition, the subject background factors (e.g. liver function and tumor progression) Midostaurin clinical trial and operative procedures vary among reports. CQ19 What treatment is effective for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma? It is recommended that a treatment policy for recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma be decided based on the same criteria as those for primary hepatocellular carcinoma. In other words, hepatectomy is a standard treatment, and in particular, repeat hepatectomy is advisable for patients with single hepatocellular

carcinoma having good liver function (non-cirrhotic liver or Child class A patients). (grade B) Comparisons of results in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma who did and did not undergo second hepatectomy reported a good prognosis medchemexpress in the second hepatectomy group (LF005051 level 2b, LF002432 level 2b, LF112693 level 2b), and the survival prognosis after re-hepatectomy was comparable to that after the first hepatectomy (LF003434 level 2b, LF117995 level 2b). As with the first hepatectomy, prognostic factors after repeat hepatectomy include portal vein invasion, hepatic functional reserve and tumor number (LF002432 level 2b, LF112693 level 2b, LF003434 level 2b, LF117995 level 2b, LF113756 level 4, LF115697 level 4). In addition, time to recurrence was found to be a prognostic factor in many reports (LF002432 level 2b, LF112693 level 2b, LF117995 level 2b, LF113756 level 4). In these reports, however, resection was actually performed in 11–30% of patients with recurrence. For local ablation therapy in patients with recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma, only level 4 reports are available (LF117938 level 4, LF118149 level 4). For transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE), only one level 4 report was found (LF1206310 level 4).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>