PURPOSE: Defining the benefits of resection of isolated non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine (NCRNNE) liver metastases is difficult. To better understand the survival benefit in this group of patients, we conducted a systematic review of the previous literature. METHODS: Medline, Web of Knowledge, and manual searches were performed using search terms, such as "liver resection" and "primary tumor." Inclusion criteria were year>1990, >five patients, and median survival reported or derived. An expected median survival was calculated from weighted averages of median survivals, and differences were assessed using a permutation test. RESULTS: A total of 7,857 references were identified. Overall 4,735 abstracts were reviewed; 120 manuscripts evaluated and of these, 73 met the study inclusion criteria. The final population consisted of 3,596 patients with renal (n=234), ovarian (n=119), testicular (n=153), adrenal (n=90), small bowel (n=28), gallbladder (n=21), duodenum (n=38), gastric (n=481), pancreatic (n=55), esophageal (n=23), head and neck (n=15), and lung (n=36) cancers, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) (n=106), cholangiocarcinoma (n=13), sarcoma (n=189), and melanoma (n=643). The greatest expected median was 63 months for genitourinary (GU) primaries (n=549; range 5.4-142 months) followed by 44.4 months for breast cancer (n=1,013; range 8-74 months), 22.3 months for gastrointestinal cancer (n=549; range 5-58 months), and 23.7 months for other tumor types (n=1,082; range 10-72 months). Using a permutation test, we observed that survival was best for patients with GU primaries followed by that for breast cancer patients. Additionally, we also observed that survival was similar for those with cancer of the GI tract and other primary sites. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a benefit to resection for patients with NCRNNE liver metastases. The degree of survival advantage is predicated by primary site.
PURPOSE: Defining the benefits of resection of isolated non-colorectal, non-neuroendocrine (NCRNNE) liver metastases is difficult. To better understand the survival benefit in this group of patients, we conducted a systematic review of the previous literature. METHODS: Medline, Web of Knowledge, and manual searches were performed using search terms, such as "liver resection" and "primary tumor." Inclusion criteria were year>1990, >five patients, and median survival reported or derived. An expected median survival was calculated from weighted averages of median survivals, and differences were assessed using a permutation test. RESULTS: A total of 7,857 references were identified. Overall 4,735 abstracts were reviewed; 120 manuscripts evaluated and of these, 73 met the study inclusion criteria. The final population consisted of 3,596 patients with renal (n=234), ovarian (n=119), testicular (n=153), adrenal (n=90), small bowel (n=28), gallbladder (n=21), duodenum (n=38), gastric (n=481), pancreatic (n=55), esophageal (n=23), head and neck (n=15), and lung (n=36) cancers, gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) (n=106), cholangiocarcinoma (n=13), sarcoma (n=189), and melanoma (n=643). The greatest expected median was 63 months for genitourinary (GU) primaries (n=549; range 5.4-142 months) followed by 44.4 months for breast cancer (n=1,013; range 8-74 months), 22.3 months for gastrointestinal cancer (n=549; range 5-58 months), and 23.7 months for other tumor types (n=1,082; range 10-72 months). Using a permutation test, we observed that survival was best for patients with GU primaries followed by that for breast cancerpatients. Additionally, we also observed that survival was similar for those with cancer of the GI tract and other primary sites. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a benefit to resection for patients with NCRNNE liver metastases. The degree of survival advantage is predicated by primary site.
Authors: Katrin Hoffmann; Clemens Franz; Ulf Hinz; Peter Schirmacher; Christian Herfarth; Michael Eichbaum; Markus W Büchler; Peter Schemmer Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-02-09 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: G A M van Walsum; J A M de Ridder; C Verhoef; K Bosscha; T M van Gulik; E J Hesselink; T J M Ruers; M P van den Tol; I D Nagtegaal; M Brouwers; R van Hillegersberg; R J Porte; A M Rijken; L J A Strobbe; J H W de Wilt Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2012-06-07 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: S Kondo; H Katoh; M Omi; S Hirano; Y Ambo; E Tanaka; M Kaji; S Ohtake; K Itoh; H Yamada; S Okushiba; T Morikawa Journal: Hepatogastroenterology Date: 2000 Nov-Dec
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: Tobias S Schiergens; Juliane Lüning; Bernhard W Renz; Michael Thomas; Sebastian Pratschke; Hao Feng; Serene M L Lee; Jutta Engel; Markus Rentsch; Markus Guba; Jens Werner; Wolfgang E Thasler Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Dayna P Y Sim; Brian K P Goh; Ser-Yee Lee; Chung-Yip Chan; Iain B H Tan; Peng-Chung Cheow; Premaraj Jeyaraj; Pierce K H Chow; London L P J Ooi; Alexander Y F Chung Journal: World J Surg Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Frederike A B Grimme; Maarten F J Seesing; Richard van Hillegersberg; Frits van Coevorden; Koert P de Jong; Iris D Nagtegaal; Cornelis Verhoef; Johannes H W de Wilt Journal: Dig Surg Date: 2018-09-25 Impact factor: 2.588