BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy for the treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases has not been established yet. In this study, we present the outcomes and survival rates of the patients who underwent simultaneous or delayed resections. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of liver resections in our institution between 1997 and 2006. RESULTS: Among the 89 patients presenting with synchronous colorectal liver metastases, 28 underwent simultaneous and 61 underwent delayed resection. Age, sex and localization of the primary tumour were similar in the 2 groups. Duration of surgery and hospital stay were longer in the simultaneous resection group, and blood loss was also greater in this group. However, these factors did not influence the frequency of complications, which did not differ between the groups. When we included data from initial colectomy, these differences were either not significant or in favour of synchronous resection. In the delayed resection group, colon resection was performed in different hospitals. The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 78%, 70% and 45%, respectively, in the simultaneous and 88%, 55% and 38%, respectively, in the delayed resection groups. CONCLUSION: In select patients, the risk of simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases is comparable to delayed resection, and increases in blood loss and operating time associated with simultaneous resections do not have a negative influence on long-term outcome. Positive outcomes of simultaneous liver resections in our study could be a result of good patient selection or experience with oncological liver surgery.
BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy for the treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases has not been established yet. In this study, we present the outcomes and survival rates of the patients who underwent simultaneous or delayed resections. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of liver resections in our institution between 1997 and 2006. RESULTS: Among the 89 patients presenting with synchronous colorectal liver metastases, 28 underwent simultaneous and 61 underwent delayed resection. Age, sex and localization of the primary tumour were similar in the 2 groups. Duration of surgery and hospital stay were longer in the simultaneous resection group, and blood loss was also greater in this group. However, these factors did not influence the frequency of complications, which did not differ between the groups. When we included data from initial colectomy, these differences were either not significant or in favour of synchronous resection. In the delayed resection group, colon resection was performed in different hospitals. The 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 78%, 70% and 45%, respectively, in the simultaneous and 88%, 55% and 38%, respectively, in the delayed resection groups. CONCLUSION: In select patients, the risk of simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases is comparable to delayed resection, and increases in blood loss and operating time associated with simultaneous resections do not have a negative influence on long-term outcome. Positive outcomes of simultaneous liver resections in our study could be a result of good patient selection or experience with oncological liver surgery.
Authors: Elie Oussoultzoglou; Philippe Bachellier; Edoardo Rosso; Radu Scurtu; Ioan Lucescu; Michel Greget; Daniel Jaeck Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Y Fong; A M Cohen; J G Fortner; W E Enker; A D Turnbull; D G Coit; A M Marrero; M Prasad; L H Blumgart; M F Brennan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 44.544
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