Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Surgical Treatment in Proximal Bile Duct Cancer: A Single-Center Experience

Open access
Pichlmayr, Rudolf, Weimann, Arved, Klempnauer, Jürgen, Oldhafer, Karl J., Maschek, Hansjörg, Tusch, Günter, Ringe, Burckhardt·1996·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The authors evaluated the experience and results of a single center in surgical treatment of proximal bile duct carcinoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Whenever feasible, surgery is the appropriate treatment in proximal bile duct carcinoma. To improve survival rates and with special regard to liver transplantation, the extent of surgical radicalness remains an open issue. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 249 patients who underwent surgery for proximal bile duct carcinoma via the following procedures: resection (n = 125), liver transplantation (n = 25), and exploratory laparotomy (n = 99). Survival rates were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method, uni- and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors, and log rank test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: Survival rates after resection and liver transplantation are correlated with international Union Against Cancer (UICC) tumor stage (resection: overall 5-year, 27.1%; stage I and II, 41.9%; stage IV, 20.7%; liver transplantation: overall 5-year, 17.1%; stage I and II, 37.8%; stage IV, 5.8%). Significant univariate prognostic factors for survival after liver resection were lymph node involvement (N category), tumor stage, tumor-free margins, and vascular invasion; for transplantation, they were local tumor extent, N category, tumor stage, and infiltration of liver parenchyma. For resection and transplantation, a multivariate analysis showed prognostic significance of tumor stage and tumor-free margins. CONCLUSION: Resection remains the treatment of choice in proximal bile duct carcinoma. Whenever possible, decisions about resectability should be made during laparotomy. With regard to the observation of long-term survivors, liver transplantation still can be justified in selected patients with stage II carcinoma. It is unknown whether more radical procedures, such as liver transplantation combined with multivisceral resections, will lead to better outcome in advanced stages. With regard to palliation, surgical drainage of the biliary system performed as hepatojejunostomy can be recommended.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00000658-199611000-00007

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
Pichlmayr, R., Weimann, A., Klempnauer, J., Oldhafer, K. J., Maschek, H., Tusch, G., & Ringe, B.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
1996-11
Volume
224
Issue
5
Pages
628-638
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079615634
Cited by
309
References
18
FWCI
11.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Surgical Treatment in Proximal Bile Duct Cancer: A Single-Center Experience. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00000658-199611000-00007
The paper
Pichlmayr, R., Weimann, A., Klempnauer, J., Oldhafer, K. J., Maschek, H., Tusch, G., & Ringe, B. (1996). Surgical Treatment in Proximal Bile Duct Cancer: A Single-Center Experience. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199611000-00007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.