Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 414

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

Difficulty of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Proposal for a New Classification

Kawaguchi, Yoshikuni, Fuks, David, Kokudo, Norihiro, Gayet, Brice·2018·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We propose an objective and practical classification system to predict difficulty of different laparoscopic liver resections (LLRs). BACKGROUND: Surgical difficulty is highly subjective and is not influenced only by surgical factors. Consequently, few series have described the degree of difficulty of LLR or attempted to objectively assess the surgical difficulty. METHODS: From a prospectively maintained database between 1995 and 2015, patients undergoing LLR without simultaneous procedures were selected, and LLR procedures were divided into 3 groups according to scores based on operative time (< or ≥190 minutes), blood loss (< or ≥100 mL), and conversion rate (< or ≥4.2%). RESULTS: Altogether, 452 LLRs were divided into 3 groups based on their scores. Group I (0 point) included wedge resection and left lateral sectionectomy. Group II (2 points) included anterolateral segmentectomy and left hepatectomy. Group III (3 points) included posterosuperior segmentectomy, right posterior sectionectomy, right hepatectomy, central hepatectomy, and extended left/right hepatectomy. The rates of overall morbidity (groups I, II, and III: 8.4%, 17.3% and 45.7%, respectively, P < 0.001) and major complications (1.1%, 4.0%, and 20.4%, respectively, P < 0.001) increased significantly with a stepwise increase of groups from I to III (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This objective and practical classification system allows the stratification of LLR comprising the low (group I), the intermediate (group II), and the high (group III) grades.

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/sla.0000000000002176

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

Metadata

Authors
Kawaguchi, Y., Fuks, D., Kokudo, N., & Gayet, B.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2018-01
Volume
267
Issue
1
Pages
13-17
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2586070204
Cited by
414
References
18
FWCI
16.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Difficulty of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Proposal for a New Classification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0000000000002176
The paper
Kawaguchi, Y., Fuks, D., Kokudo, N., & Gayet, B. (2018). Difficulty of Laparoscopic Liver Resection: Proposal for a New Classification. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002176

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.