Comment on “Outcomes of curative liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis”

The present letter to the editor is in response to the research “Outcomes of curative liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis” by Elshaarawy et al in World J Gastroenterol 2021; 13(5): 424–439. The preoperative assessment of the liver reserve function in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with cirrhosis is crucial, and there is no universal consensus on how to assess it. Based on a retrospective study, Elshaarawy et al investigated the impact of various classical clinical indicators on liver failure and the prognosis after hepatectomy in HCC patients with cirrhosis. We recommend that we should strive to explore new appraisal indicators, such as the indocyanine green retention rate at 15 min.     

The role of endoscopic ultrasound for portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis

Journal of Medical Ultrasonics - Chronic liver disease is still a major problem because disease progression will ultimately lead to liver cirrhosis. Portal hypertension is the hallmark in advanced...     

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PurposeUnderstanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.ResultsAcross the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.ConclusionWe describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.