This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Quality of Care, Other  • Hepatobiliary Surgery  • Alert me on articles by topic

Stephen E. Ettinghausen, MD
Rochester, NY

Arch Surg. 2003;138:1206.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Today there is a heightened focus on mortality and cost as related to hospital and individual surgeon volumes for increasing numbers of major operative procedures. As such, liver resection has been included in the outcomes' spotlight.

In this article by Imamura et al, the authors present their mortality and morbidity results from 915 patients undergoing 1056 hepatic resections. Clearly, the authors are to be lauded for their excellent operative outcomes in this large, heterogeneous group of patients. The results speak for themselves: postoperative liver failure in only one patient; single-digit major complication rates in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, many of whom had concurrent cirrhosis; and no operative mortality in the entire series.

After reviewing this study, the liver resectionist should take particular note of the authors' preoperative algorithm for deciding on extent of resection. It is this systematic approach to these patients that separates this article . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

One Thousand Fifty-Six Hepatectomies Without Mortality in 8 Years
Hiroshi Imamura, Yasuji Seyama, Norihiro Kokudo, Atsushi Maema, Yasuhiko Sugawara, Keiji Sano, Tadatoshi Takayama, and Masatoshi Makuuchi
Arch Surg. 2003;138(11):1198-1206.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT