English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Aim . Determination of first line treatment with limited hepatectomy or Anatomical hepatectomy provides better clinical outcome.  Methods . Immediate and long-term outcomes of 106 patients who underwent partial hepatectomy for RH at our institution from January 2001 to February 2005 were analyzed retrospectively. Clinical end-points included time to recovery of hepatic function, residual stones, infection of the liver remnant, bile leakage, recurrent stones, morbidity, and mortality.  Results . LH was performed in 59 patients and AH in 47 patients as first-line treatment. The time of hepatic function recovery was not statistically different between the two groups ( P  > .05). However, Patients in AH group suffered from less residual stones ( P  < .05), less infection of the raw surface of liver remnant ( P  < .05), and less bile leakage ( P  < .05), with a median follow-up of 40.3 ± 0.8 months (range 3–48), and AH group suffered a less recurrent stone rate ( P  < .05). No difference in morbidity, and mortality rates between the two groups.  Conclusion . AH is a safe and effective treatment for RH, with a fair rate of surgical complications, it should be considered as first-line treatment of RH.

An Appraisal of Anatomical and Limited Hepatectomy for Regional Hepatolithiasis