BACKGROUND: The management of patients with liver metastasis from a gynecologic carcinoma remains controversial, as there is currently little data available. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of liver-directed surgery for hepatic metastasis from gynecologic primaries. METHODS: Between 1990 and 2010, 87 patients with biopsy-proven liver metastasis from a gynecologic carcinoma were identified from an institutional hepatobiliary database. Fifty-two (60%) patients who underwent hepatic surgery for their liver disease and 35 (40%) patients who underwent biopsy only were matched for age, primary tumor characteristics, and hepatic tumor burden. Clinicopathologic, operative, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 87 patients, 30 (34%) presented with synchronous metastasis. The majority of patients had multiple hepatic tumors (63%), with a median size of the largest lesion being 2.5 cm. Of those patients who underwent liver surgery (n=52), most underwent a minor hepatic resection (n=44; 85%), while 29 (56%) patients underwent concurrent lymphadenectomy and 45 (87%) patients underwent simultaneous peritoneal debulking. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 37% and 0%, respectively. Median survival from time of diagnosis was 53 months for patients who underwent liver-directed surgery compared with 21 months for patients who underwent biopsy alone (n=35) (p=0.01). Among those patients who underwent liver-directed surgery, 5-year survival following hepatic resection was 41%. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic surgery for liver metastasis from gynecologic cancer can be performed safely. Liver surgery may be associated with prolonged survival in a subset of patients with hepatic metastasis from gynecologic primaries and therefore should be considered in carefully selected patients.
BACKGROUND: The management of patients with liver metastasis from a gynecologic carcinoma remains controversial, as there is currently little data available. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of liver-directed surgery for hepatic metastasis from gynecologic primaries. METHODS: Between 1990 and 2010, 87 patients with biopsy-proven liver metastasis from a gynecologic carcinoma were identified from an institutional hepatobiliary database. Fifty-two (60%) patients who underwent hepatic surgery for their liver disease and 35 (40%) patients who underwent biopsy only were matched for age, primary tumor characteristics, and hepatic tumor burden. Clinicopathologic, operative, and outcome data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 87 patients, 30 (34%) presented with synchronous metastasis. The majority of patients had multiple hepatic tumors (63%), with a median size of the largest lesion being 2.5 cm. Of those patients who underwent liver surgery (n=52), most underwent a minor hepatic resection (n=44; 85%), while 29 (56%) patients underwent concurrent lymphadenectomy and 45 (87%) patients underwent simultaneous peritoneal debulking. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 37% and 0%, respectively. Median survival from time of diagnosis was 53 months for patients who underwent liver-directed surgery compared with 21 months for patients who underwent biopsy alone (n=35) (p=0.01). Among those patients who underwent liver-directed surgery, 5-year survival following hepatic resection was 41%. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic surgery for liver metastasis from gynecologic cancer can be performed safely. Liver surgery may be associated with prolonged survival in a subset of patients with hepatic metastasis from gynecologic primaries and therefore should be considered in carefully selected patients.
Authors: Mirjam J A Engelen; Henrike E Kos; Pax H B Willemse; Jan G Aalders; Elisabeth G E de Vries; Michael Schaapveld; Renee Otter; Ate G J van der Zee Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: G Ercolani; G Vetrone; G L Grazi; M Cescon; P Di Gioia; M Ravaioli; M Del Gaudio; F Tuci; M Zanello; A Cucchetti; A D Pinna Journal: Minerva Chir Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: June Y Hou; Michael G Kelly; Herbert Yu; Jessica N McAlpine; Masoud Azodi; Thomas J Rutherford; Peter E Schwartz Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2007-01-18 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: H M Goodman; B L Harlow; E E Sheets; M G Muto; S Brooks; M Steller; R C Knapp; R S Berkowitz Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 1992-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Melissa A Merideth; William A Cliby; Gary L Keeney; Timothy G Lesnick; David M Nagorney; Karl C Podratz Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Timothy M Pawlik; Ana Luiza Gleisner; Todd W Bauer; Reid B Adams; Srinevas K Reddy; Bryan M Clary; Robert C Martin; Charles R Scoggins; Kenneth K Tanabe; James S Michaelson; David A Kooby; Charles A Staley; Richard D Schulick; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Eddie K Abdalla; Steven A Curley; Michael A Choti; Dominque Elias Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2007-06-06 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Liliane Mpabanzi; Kim M C van Mierlo; Massimo Malagó; Cornelis H C Dejong; Dimitrios Lytras; Steven W M Olde Damink Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2012-10-22 Impact factor: 3.647