BACKGROUND: For patients who present with synchronous colorectal carcinoma and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM), a reversed treatment sequence in which the CRLM are resected before the primary carcinoma has been proposed (liver-first approach). The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility and outcome of this approach for synchronous CRLM. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2010, 22 patients were planned to undergo the liver-first approach. Feasibility and outcomes were prospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 22 patients planned to undergo the liver-first strategy, the approach was completed in 18 patients (81.8%). The main reason for treatment failure was disease progression. Patients who completed treatment and patients who deviated from the protocol had a similar location of the primary tumour, as well as comparable size, number and distribution of CRLM (all P > 0.05). Post-operative morbidity and mortality were 27.3% and 0% following liver resection and 44.4% and 5.6% after colorectal surgery, respectively. On an intention-to-treat-basis, overall 3-year survival was 41.1%. However, 37.5% of patients who completed the treatment had developed recurrent disease at the time of the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The liver-first approach is feasible in approximately four-fifths of patients and can be performed with peri-operative mortality and morbidity similar to the traditional treatment paradigm. Patients treated with this novel strategy derive a considerable overall-survival-benefit, although disease-recurrence-rates remain relatively high, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach.
BACKGROUND: For patients who present with synchronous colorectal carcinoma and colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM), a reversed treatment sequence in which the CRLM are resected before the primary carcinoma has been proposed (liver-first approach). The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility and outcome of this approach for synchronous CRLM. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2010, 22 patients were planned to undergo the liver-first approach. Feasibility and outcomes were prospectively evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 22 patients planned to undergo the liver-first strategy, the approach was completed in 18 patients (81.8%). The main reason for treatment failure was disease progression. Patients who completed treatment and patients who deviated from the protocol had a similar location of the primary tumour, as well as comparable size, number and distribution of CRLM (all P > 0.05). Post-operative morbidity and mortality were 27.3% and 0% following liver resection and 44.4% and 5.6% after colorectal surgery, respectively. On an intention-to-treat-basis, overall 3-year survival was 41.1%. However, 37.5% of patients who completed the treatment had developed recurrent disease at the time of the last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The liver-first approach is feasible in approximately four-fifths of patients and can be performed with peri-operative mortality and morbidity similar to the traditional treatment paradigm. Patients treated with this novel strategy derive a considerable overall-survival-benefit, although disease-recurrence-rates remain relatively high, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach.
Authors: J N Vauthey; A Chaoui; K A Do; M M Bilimoria; M J Fenstermacher; C Charnsangavej; M Hicks; G Alsfasser; G Lauwers; I F Hawkins; J Caridi Journal: Surgery Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: René Adam; Gerard Pascal; Denis Castaing; Daniel Azoulay; Valerie Delvart; Bernard Paule; Francis Levi; Henri Bismuth Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: E Van Dessel; K Fierens; P Pattyn; Y Van Nieuwenhove; F Berrevoet; R Troisi; W Ceelen Journal: Acta Chir Belg Date: 2009 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.090
Authors: Christian Wittekind; Carolyn Compton; Phil Quirke; Iris Nagtegaal; Susanne Merkel; Paul Hermanek; Leslie H Sobin Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
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: Mechteld C de Jong; Skye C Mayo; Carlo Pulitano; Serena Lanella; Dario Ribero; Jennifer Strub; Catherine Hubert; Jean-François Gigot; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; Luca Aldrighetti; Gilles Mentha; Lorenzo Capussotti; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Bolanle Asiyanbola; David Chang; Ana Luiza Gleisner; Hari Nathan; Michael A Choti; Richard D Schulick; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-02-12 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: S Ahmed; O Bathe; S Berry; D Buie; J Davies; C Doll; S Dowden; S Gill; V Gordon; P Hebbard; E Jones; H Kennecke; S Koski; M Krahn; D Le; H Lim; C Lund; Y Luo; A Mcffadden; J Mcghie; K Mulder; J Park; F Rashidi; A Sami; K T Tan; R Wong Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: H Salvador-Rosés; S López-Ben; P Planellas; E Canals; M Casellas-Robert; R Farrés; E Ramos; A Codina-Cazador; J Figueras Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: C A Kim; S Ahmed; S Ahmed; B Brunet; H Chalchal; R Deobald; C Doll; M P Dupre; V Gordon; R M Lee-Ying; H Lim; D Liu; J M Loree; J P McGhie; K Mulder; J Park; B Yip; R P Wong; A Zaidi Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: René Adam; Aimery De Gramont; Joan Figueras; Ashley Guthrie; Norihiro Kokudo; Francis Kunstlinger; Evelyne Loyer; Graeme Poston; Philippe Rougier; Laura Rubbia-Brandt; Alberto Sobrero; Josep Tabernero; Catherine Teh; Eric Van Cutsem Journal: Oncologist Date: 2012-09-07