MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3145219204 · doi:10.1101/2021.03.26.21254407

Recent trends in postoperative mortality after liver resection- A systemic review and metanalysis of studies published in last 5 years and metaregression of various factors affecting 90 days mortality

2021· review· en· W3145219204 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bhavin Vasavada, Hardik Patel

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHepatectomyPublication biasFunnel plotHepatocellular carcinomaMeta-analysisCochrane LibraryInternal medicineStudy heterogeneityColorectal cancerUnivariate analysisMortality rateMultivariate analysisSurgeryGastroenterologyResectionCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim The aim of this systemic review and meta-analysis was to analyse 90 days mortality after liver resection, and also study various factors associated with mortality via univariate and multivariate metaregression. Methods PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, google scholar, web of science with keywords like ‘liver resection”; “mortality”;” hepatectomy”. Weighted percentage 90 days mortalities were analysed. univariate metaregression was done by DerSimonian-Liard methods. Major hepatectomy, open surgery, cirrhotic livers, blood loss, hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis were taken as moderators in metaregression analysis. We decided to enter all co-variants in multivariate model to look for mixed effects. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I 2 test, with values of 25%, 50% and 75% indicating low, moderate and high degrees of heterogeneity. Cohort studies were assessed for bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale to assess for the risk of bias. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot. Funnel plot asymmetry was evaluated by Egger’s test. Results Total 29931 patients’ data who underwent liver resections for various etiologies were pooled from 41 studied included1257 patients died within 90 days post operatively. Weighted 90 days mortality was 3.6% (95% C.I 2.8% −4.4%). However, heterogeneity of the analysis was high with I 2 94.625%.(p<0.001). We analysed various covariates like major hepatectomy, Age of the patient, blood loss, open surgery, liver resections done for hepatocellular carcinoma or colorectal liver metastasis and cirrhotic liver to check for their association with heterogeneity in the analysis and hence 90 days mortality. On univariate metaregression analysis major hepatectomy (p<0.001), Open hepatectomy (p<0.001), blood loss (p=0.002) was associated with heterogeneity in the analysis and 90 days mortality. On multivariate metaregression Major hepatectomy(p=0.003) and Open surgery (p=0.012) was independently associated with higher 90 days mortality, and liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis was independently associated with lesser 90 days mortality (z= −4.11,p<0.01). Residual heterogeneity after all factor multivariate metaregression model was none (I 2 =0,Tau 2 =0, H 2 =1) and nonsignificant (p=0.49). Conclusion Major hepatectomy, open hepatectomy, and cirrhotic background is associated with higher mortality rates and colorectal liver metastasis is associated with lower peri operative mortality rates.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.045
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.175
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis→French-language works237,207→