BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The surgical strategy for treatment of synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer remains controversial. This retrospective analysis was conducted to compare the postoperative outcome and survival of patients receiving simultaneous resection of liver metastases and primary colorectal cancer to those receiving staged resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1988 and September 2005, 219 patients underwent liver resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases, of whom, 40 patients received simultaneous resection of liver metastases and primary colorectal cancer, and 179 patients staged resections. Patients were identified from a prospective database, and records were retrospectively reviewed. Patient, tumor, and operative parameters were analyzed for their influence on postoperative morbidity and mortality as well as on long-term survival. RESULTS: Simultaneous liver resections tend to be performed for colon primaries rather than for rectal cancer (p = 0.004) and used less extensive liver resections (p < 0.001). The postoperative morbidity was comparable between both groups, whereas the mortality was significantly higher in patients with simultaneous liver resection (p = 0.012). The mortality after simultaneous liver resection (n = 4) occurred after major hepatectomies, and three of these four patients were 70 years of age or older. There was no significant difference in long-term survival after formally curative simultaneous and staged liver resection. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous liver and colorectal resection is as efficient as staged resections in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. To perform simultaneous resections safely a careful patient selection is necessary. The most important criteria to select patients for simultaneous liver resection are age of the patient and extent of liver resection.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The surgical strategy for treatment of synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer remains controversial. This retrospective analysis was conducted to compare the postoperative outcome and survival of patients receiving simultaneous resection of liver metastases and primary colorectal cancer to those receiving staged resection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1988 and September 2005, 219 patients underwent liver resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases, of whom, 40 patients received simultaneous resection of liver metastases and primary colorectal cancer, and 179 patients staged resections. Patients were identified from a prospective database, and records were retrospectively reviewed. Patient, tumor, and operative parameters were analyzed for their influence on postoperative morbidity and mortality as well as on long-term survival. RESULTS: Simultaneous liver resections tend to be performed for colon primaries rather than for rectal cancer (p = 0.004) and used less extensive liver resections (p < 0.001). The postoperative morbidity was comparable between both groups, whereas the mortality was significantly higher in patients with simultaneous liver resection (p = 0.012). The mortality after simultaneous liver resection (n = 4) occurred after major hepatectomies, and three of these four patients were 70 years of age or older. There was no significant difference in long-term survival after formally curative simultaneous and staged liver resection. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous liver and colorectal resection is as efficient as staged resections in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. To perform simultaneous resections safely a careful patient selection is necessary. The most important criteria to select patients for simultaneous liver resection are age of the patient and extent of liver resection.
Authors: K S Hughes; R Simon; S Songhorabodi; M A Adson; D M Ilstrup; J G Fortner; B J Maclean; J H Foster; J M Daly; D Fitzherbert Journal: Surgery Date: 1986-08 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Ahmedin Jemal; Ram C Tiwari; Taylor Murray; Asma Ghafoor; Alicia Samuels; Elizabeth Ward; Eric J Feuer; Michael J Thun Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2004 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Robert Martin; Philip Paty; Yuman Fong; Andrew Grace; Alfred Cohen; Ronald DeMatteo; William Jarnagin; Leslie Blumgart Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Eduardo de Santibañes; Diego Fernandez; Carlos Vaccaro; Guillermo Ojea Quintana; Fernando Bonadeo; Juan Pekolj; Carlos Bonofiglio; Ernesto Molmenti Journal: World J Surg Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Christina Cellini; Steven R Hunt; James W Fleshman; Elisa H Birnbaum; Andrew J Bierhals; Matthew G Mutch Journal: World J Surg Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti; Alessandro Giacomoni; Andrea Coratti; Pietro Addeo; Francesco Maria Bianco Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2010-07-10 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Luca Viganò; Mehdi Karoui; Alessandro Ferrero; Claude Tayar; Daniel Cherqui; Lorenzo Capussotti Journal: World J Surg Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Maciej Slupski; Zbigniew Wlodarczyk; Milosz Jasinski; Marek Masztalerz; Jerzy Tujakowski Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Osama H Hamed; Neil H Bhayani; Gail Ortenzi; Jussuf T Kaifi; Eric T Kimchi; Kevin F Staveley-O'Carroll; Niraj J Gusani Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2012-12-27 Impact factor: 3.647