AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of simultaneous versus two stage resection of primary colorectal tumors and liver metastases. METHODS: From January 1996 to May 2004, 103 colorectal tumor patients presented with synchronous liver metastases. Twenty five underwent simultaneous colorectal and liver surgery and 78 underwent liver surgery 1-3 mo after primary colorectal tumor resection. Data were retrospectively analyzed to assess and compare the morbidity and mortality between the surgical strategies. The two groups were comparable regarding the age and sex distribution, the types of liver resection and stage of primary tumors, as well as the number and size of liver metastases. RESULTS: In two-stage procedures more transfusions were required (4 +/- 1.5 vs 2 +/- 1.8, pRBCs, P < 0.05). Chest infection was increased after the two-stage approach (26% vs 17%, P < 0.05). The two-stage procedure was also associated with longer hospitalization (20 +/- 8 vs 12 +/- 6 d, P < 0.05). Five year survival in both groups was similar (28% vs 31%). No hospital mortality occurred in our series. CONCLUSION: Synchronous colorectal liver metastases can be safely treated simultaneously with the primary tumor. Liver resection should be prioritized over colon resection. It is advisable that complex liver resections with marginal liver residual volume should be dealt with at a later stage.
AIM: To compare the safety and efficacy of simultaneous versus two stage resection of primary colorectal tumors and liver metastases. METHODS: From January 1996 to May 2004, 103 colorectal tumorpatients presented with synchronous liver metastases. Twenty five underwent simultaneous colorectal and liver surgery and 78 underwent liver surgery 1-3 mo after primary colorectal tumor resection. Data were retrospectively analyzed to assess and compare the morbidity and mortality between the surgical strategies. The two groups were comparable regarding the age and sex distribution, the types of liver resection and stage of primary tumors, as well as the number and size of liver metastases. RESULTS: In two-stage procedures more transfusions were required (4 +/- 1.5 vs 2 +/- 1.8, pRBCs, P < 0.05). Chest infection was increased after the two-stage approach (26% vs 17%, P < 0.05). The two-stage procedure was also associated with longer hospitalization (20 +/- 8 vs 12 +/- 6 d, P < 0.05). Five year survival in both groups was similar (28% vs 31%). No hospital mortality occurred in our series. CONCLUSION:Synchronous colorectal liver metastases can be safely treated simultaneously with the primary tumor. Liver resection should be prioritized over colon resection. It is advisable that complex liver resections with marginal liver residual volume should be dealt with at a later stage.
Authors: Vassilios E Smyrniotis; Georgia G Kostopanagiotou; John C Contis; Charalampos I Farantos; Dionisios C Voros; Dimitrios C Kannas; John S Koskinas Journal: World J Surg Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 3.352
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: Francesco M Polignano; Aaron J Quyn; Pandanaboyana Sanjay; Nikola A Henderson; Iain S Tait Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-03-22 Impact factor: 4.584
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
Authors: Ajith K Siriwardena; James M Mason; Saifee Mullamitha; Helen C Hancock; Santhalingam Jegatheeswaran Journal: Nat Rev Clin Oncol Date: 2014-06-03 Impact factor: 66.675