OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of surgical margin width on survival following R0 hepatic resection for colorectal metastases (CRLM). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although negative resection margin is considered of paramount importance for the prognosis of patients with colorectal liver metastases, optimal resection margin width remains controversial. METHODS: Eligible studies examining the association between margin status after R0 hepatic resection for CRLM and survival, including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were sought using the Medline, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases. Random-effects models were used for the calculation of pooled relative risks (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were deemed eligible for inclusion representing a cohort of 11,147 hepatic resections. Wider resection margin (>1 vs <1 cm) was significantly associated with improved OS at 3 years (pooled RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.79-0.95), 5 years (pooled RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85-0.97), and 10 years (pooled RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.88-1.00). Similarly, DFS was positively associated with >1 cm resection margin at 3, 5, and 10 years. Interestingly, >1 mm (vs <1 mm) resection margin was significantly associated with improved OS at all-time points. Meta-regression analyses did not reveal any significant modifying role of the study features under investigation, such as the administration of neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Importantly, our findings suggest that while a >1 mm margin is associated with better prognosis than a submillimeter margin, achieving a margin >1 cm may result in even better oncologic outcomes and should be considered if possible.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of surgical margin width on survival following R0 hepatic resection for colorectal metastases (CRLM). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although negative resection margin is considered of paramount importance for the prognosis of patients with colorectal liver metastases, optimal resection margin width remains controversial. METHODS: Eligible studies examining the association between margin status after R0 hepatic resection for CRLM and survival, including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were sought using the Medline, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases. Random-effects models were used for the calculation of pooled relative risks (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were deemed eligible for inclusion representing a cohort of 11,147 hepatic resections. Wider resection margin (>1 vs <1 cm) was significantly associated with improved OS at 3 years (pooled RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.79-0.95), 5 years (pooled RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85-0.97), and 10 years (pooled RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.88-1.00). Similarly, DFS was positively associated with >1 cm resection margin at 3, 5, and 10 years. Interestingly, >1 mm (vs <1 mm) resection margin was significantly associated with improved OS at all-time points. Meta-regression analyses did not reveal any significant modifying role of the study features under investigation, such as the administration of neoadjuvant/adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Importantly, our findings suggest that while a >1 mm margin is associated with better prognosis than a submillimeter margin, achieving a margin >1 cm may result in even better oncologic outcomes and should be considered if possible.
Authors: Pieter M H Nierop; Diederik J Höppener; Eric P van der Stok; Boris Galjart; Florian E Buisman; Vinod P Balachandran; William R Jarnagin; T Peter Kingham; Peter J Allen; Jinru Shia; Peter B Vermeulen; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Dirk J Grünhagen; Cornelis Verhoef; Michael I D'Angelica Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2019-11-15 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Renato Gomes Campanati; João Bernardo Sancio; Lucas Mauro de Andrade Sucena; Marcelo Dias Sanches; Vivian Resende Journal: Arq Bras Cir Dig Date: 2021-06-11
Authors: Gang Deng; Hui Li; Gui-Qing Jia; Dan Fang; You-Yin Tang; Jie Xie; Ke-Fei Chen; Zhe-Yu Chen Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Emilio De Raffele; Mariateresa Mirarchi; Dajana Cuicchi; Ferdinando Lecce; Claudio Ricci; Riccardo Casadei; Bruno Cola; Francesco Minni Journal: World J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2018-10-15