Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 217

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

One Hundred Two Consecutive Hepatobiliary Resections for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma With Zero Mortality

Open access
Sano, Tsuyoshi, Shimada, Kazuaki, Sakamoto, Yoshihiro, Yamamoto, Junji, Yamasaki, Susumu, Kosuge, Tomoo·2006·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

In Brief Objective: To analyze the short-term surgical outcome of hepatobiliary resections for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma in the last 5 years. Summary Background Data: Hepatobiliary resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma remains a technically demanding procedure, calling for a high level of expertise in biliary and hepatic surgery, and is still associated with significant morbidity or mortality. Methods: Between 2000 and 2004, we surgically treated 102 consecutive patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma with a management strategy consisting of preoperative biliary drainage, portal vein embolization (for right-sided and extended left-sided resections), and major hepatobiliary resection. The data on all of the patients were analyzed retrospectively to identify the factors that might significantly affect the postoperative mortality and morbidity. Results: There were no cases of in-hospital mortality or postoperative liver failure. Major complications were encountered in 7 patients (6.9%), and the overall morbidity rate was 50%. Reoperation was required in 2 patients (2%). The overall median length of postoperative hospital stay was 26 days (range, 13–119 days). Univariate analysis in relation to the postoperative morbidity showed significant differences in the preoperative occurrence of segmental cholangitis or cholecystitis (P = 0.015), the severity of postoperative hyperbilirubinemia (P < 0.001), and the total amount of fresh frozen plasma administered (P = 0.002). Multivariate analysis revealed a single independent significant predictive factor for postoperative morbidity, namely, preoperative cholangitis or cholecystitis (odds ratio, 9.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.05–78.56, P = 0.045). Conclusions: Our experience indicates that hepatobiliary resections for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma can be conducted safely, without a single case of postoperative liver failure or mortality. Occurrence of preoperative cholangitis or cholecystitis is a significant indicator for morbidity of major hepatobiliary resection. A single-institute retrospective review of 102 consecutive patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma with a management strategy consisting of preoperative biliary drainage, portal vein embolization, and major hepatobiliary resection in the last 5 years was performed. Our experience indicates that hepatobiliary resections for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma can be conducted safely, with zero mortality.

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 · 10.1097/01.sla.0000217605.66519.38

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 217

Metadata

Authors
Sano, T., Shimada, K., Sakamoto, Y., Yamamoto, J., Yamasaki, S., & Kosuge, T.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2006-08
Volume
244
Issue
2
Pages
240-247
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1999835276
Cited by
217
References
0
FWCI
12.78
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: One Hundred Two Consecutive Hepatobiliary Resections for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma With Zero Mortality. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.sla.0000217605.66519.38
The paper
Sano, T., Shimada, K., Sakamoto, Y., Yamamoto, J., Yamasaki, S., & Kosuge, T. (2006). One Hundred Two Consecutive Hepatobiliary Resections for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma With Zero Mortality. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000217605.66519.38

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.