Kiyohiko Omichi1, Yosuke Inoue2, Yoshihiro Mise1,3, Atsushi Oba1, Yoshihiro Ono1, Takafumi Sato1, Hiromichi Ito1, Yu Takahashi1, Akio Saiura1,3. 1. Department of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Department of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan. yosuke.inoue@jfcr.or.jp. 3. Department of Hepatobiliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Hongo, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hepatic resection combined with perioperative chemotherapy is the standard of care for patients with multiple colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). However, the optimal surgical strategy for treating advanced CLMs remains unclear. The role of the two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) strategy in the management of multiple CLMs remains challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of one-step hepatectomy (OSH)-treated and TSH-treated patients with multiple CLMs. METHODS: This single-institution study included 742 consecutive patients who underwent initial liver resection for histologically confirmed CLMs. The study enrolled patients with 10 or more tumors (n = 106). Clinicopathologic characteristics and long-term outcomes were compared between patients who underwent OSH and those who underwent TSH for 10 or more CLMs. RESULTS: The study planned OSH for 67 patients (63%) and TSH for 39 patients (37%). One of the OSH-planned patients and two of the TSH-planned patients underwent a trial laparotomy because of non-curative factors. Five patients (13%) did not progress to the second stage of TSH. In the entire cohort, the cumulative 3-year overall survival rate was 58.4% for the patients who had 10 or more CLMs treated with OSH compared with 61.1% for the patients treated with TSH (P = 0.746). In the curative resection cohort, the cumulative 1-year recurrence-free survival rate was 18.2% for the patients treated with OSH and 17.9% for the patients treated with TSH (P = 0.640). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatectomy with perioperative chemotherapy for advanced CLMs with 10 or more tumors is feasible and effective. To prolong survival, TSH is a promising option when curative resection with OSH is impossible.
BACKGROUND: Hepatic resection combined with perioperative chemotherapy is the standard of care for patients with multiple colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). However, the optimal surgical strategy for treating advanced CLMs remains unclear. The role of the two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) strategy in the management of multiple CLMs remains challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of one-step hepatectomy (OSH)-treated and TSH-treated patients with multiple CLMs. METHODS: This single-institution study included 742 consecutive patients who underwent initial liver resection for histologically confirmed CLMs. The study enrolled patients with 10 or more tumors (n = 106). Clinicopathologic characteristics and long-term outcomes were compared between patients who underwent OSH and those who underwent TSH for 10 or more CLMs. RESULTS: The study planned OSH for 67 patients (63%) and TSH for 39 patients (37%). One of the OSH-planned patients and two of the TSH-planned patients underwent a trial laparotomy because of non-curative factors. Five patients (13%) did not progress to the second stage of TSH. In the entire cohort, the cumulative 3-year overall survival rate was 58.4% for the patients who had 10 or more CLMs treated with OSH compared with 61.1% for the patients treated with TSH (P = 0.746). In the curative resection cohort, the cumulative 1-year recurrence-free survival rate was 18.2% for the patients treated with OSH and 17.9% for the patients treated with TSH (P = 0.640). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatectomy with perioperative chemotherapy for advanced CLMs with 10 or more tumors is feasible and effective. To prolong survival, TSH is a promising option when curative resection with OSH is impossible.
Authors: Scott Kopetz; George J Chang; Michael J Overman; Cathy Eng; Daniel J Sargent; David W Larson; Axel Grothey; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; David M Nagorney; Robert R McWilliams Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-05-26 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Junichi Shindoh; Ching-Wei D Tzeng; Thomas A Aloia; Steven A Curley; Steven Y Huang; Armeen Mahvash; Sanjay Gupta; Michael J Wallace; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2013-10-16 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Antoine Brouquet; Eddie K Abdalla; Scott Kopetz; Christopher R Garrett; Michael J Overman; Cathy Eng; Andreas Andreou; Evelyne M Loyer; David C Madoff; Steven A Curley; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: M Makuuchi; B L Thai; K Takayasu; T Takayama; T Kosuge; P Gunvén; S Yamazaki; H Hasegawa; H Ozaki Journal: Surgery Date: 1990-05 Impact factor: 3.982
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
Authors: René Adam; Aimery de Gramont; Joan Figueras; Norihiro Kokudo; Francis Kunstlinger; Evelyne Loyer; Graeme Poston; Philippe Rougier; Laura Rubbia-Brandt; Alberto Sobrero; Catherine Teh; Sabine Tejpar; Eric Van Cutsem; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Lars Påhlman Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2015-06-30 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: J Shindoh; C-W D Tzeng; T A Aloia; S A Curley; G Zimmitti; S H Wei; S Y Huang; S Gupta; M J Wallace; J-N Vauthey Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Yun Shin Chun; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Dario Ribero; Matteo Donadon; John T Mullen; Cathy Eng; David C Madoff; David Z Chang; Linus Ho; Scott Kopetz; Steven H Wei; Steven A Curley; Eddie K Abdalla Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-09-11 Impact factor: 3.452