Clinicopathological study of minimum-sized hepatocellular carcinoma: An approach to the definition of early hepatocellular carcinoma

1995 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 498-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
SOO RYANG KIM ◽  
KYONG BOO KANG ◽  
CHANG GYO SOH ◽  
JUNG HYO KIM ◽  
YOSHITAKE HAYASHI ◽  
...  
1985 ◽  
Vol 18 (12) ◽  
pp. 2453-2458
Author(s):  
Hisashi MIMURA ◽  
Norihisa TAKAKURA ◽  
Keisuke HAMAZAKI ◽  
Hitoshi KIN ◽  
Kazuo SASAOKA ◽  
...  

Choonpa Igaku ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kazuma YAMAGUCHI ◽  
Satoshi SAITO ◽  
Hideyuki DENPO ◽  
Koichi KUBOTA ◽  
Shunichiro FUJIYAMA ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 233
Author(s):  
Piera Federico ◽  
Emilio Francesco Giunta ◽  
Annalisa Pappalardo ◽  
Andrea Tufo ◽  
Gianpaolo Marte ◽  
...  

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the primary tumour of the liver with the greatest incidence, particularly in the elderly. Additionally, improvements in the treatments for chronic liver diseases have increased the number of elderly patients who might be affected by HCC. Little evidence exists regarding HCC in old patients, and the elderly are still underrepresented and undertreated in clinical trials. In fact, this population represents a complex subgroup of patients who are hard to manage, especially due to the presence of multiple comorbidities. Therefore, the choice of treatment is mainly decided by the physician in the clinical practice, who often tend not to treat elderly patients in order to avoid the possibility of adverse events, which may alter their unstable equilibrium. In this context, the clarification of the optimal treatment strategy for elderly patients affected by HCC has become an urgent necessity. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the available data regarding the treatment of HCC in elderly patients, starting from the definition of “elderly” and the geriatric assessment and scales. We explain the possible treatment choices according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) scale and their feasibility in the elderly population.


2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 619-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hari Nathan ◽  
John F.P. Bridges ◽  
Richard D. Schulick ◽  
Andrew M. Cameron ◽  
Kenzo Hirose ◽  
...  

Purpose The choice between liver transplantation (LT), liver resection (LR), and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) as initial therapy for early hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is controversial, yet little is known about how surgeons choose therapy for individual patients. We sought to quantify the impact of both clinical factors and surgeon specialty on surgical decision making in early HCC by using conjoint analysis. Methods Surgeons with an interest in liver surgery were invited to complete a Web-based survey including 10 case scenarios. Choice of therapy was then analyzed by using regression models that included both clinical factors and surgeon specialty (non-LT v LT). Results When assessing early HCC occurrences, non-LT surgeons (50% LR; 41% LT; 9% RFA) made significantly different recommendations compared with LT surgeons (63% LT; 31% LR; 6% RFA; P < .001). Clinical factors, including tumor number and size, type of resection required, and platelet count, had significant effects on the choice between LR, LT, and RFA. After adjusting for clinical factors, non-LT surgeons remained more likely than LT surgeons to choose LR compared with LT (relative risk ratio [RRR], 2.67). When the weight of each clinical factor was allowed to vary by surgeon specialty, the residual independent effect of surgeon specialty on the decision between LR and LT was negligible (RRR, 0.93). Conclusion The impact of surgeon specialty on choice of therapy for early HCC is stronger than that of some clinical factors. However, the influence of surgeon specialty does not merely reflect an across-the-board preference for one therapy over another. Rather, certain clinical factors are weighed differently by surgeons in different specialties.


HPB ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malin S. Eilard ◽  
Peter Naredi ◽  
Madeleine Helmersson ◽  
Oskar Hemmingsson ◽  
Bengt Isaksson ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
I-Pei Chen ◽  
Shun-ichi Ariizumi ◽  
Masayuki Nakano ◽  
Masakazu Yamamoto

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document