4.6 Article

Role of hepatectomy in treating multiple bilobar colorectal cancer metastases

Journal

SURGERY
Volume 143, Issue 2, Pages 259-270

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.08.015

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Although retrospective studies have demonstrated survival benefit from hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer, few studies have examined patients with multiple bilobar metastases to identify survival-related factors throughout their course. Methods. Among 2 77 patients with R0 resection for liver metastases from colorectal cancer, 79 patients had 4 or more lesions in a bilobar distribution. To determine impact on long-term outcome, we compared clinicopathologic factors retrospectively between 3-year survivors and patients who died less than 3 years after hepatectomy. Results. Among 79 patients with 4 or more bilobar metastases, 5 patients (6.3%) attained prolonged remission after initial hepatectomy. By multivariate analysis, a lack of adjuvant chemotherapy compromised survival (relative risk or RR, 2.21; P = .036), as did prehepatectomy carcinoembryonic antigen exceeding 12 ng/mL (RR, 2.12; P = .039). Treatment-related variables such as repeat resections in the event of liver recurrence (P < .01) or lung metastases (P < .05), as well as adjuvant chemotherapy (P < .01), differed significantly between 3-year survivors and nonsurvivors, as did the differences in number of metastases, maximum size of metastases, concomitant extrahepatic metastases at the time of initial hepatectomy, and disease-free interval preceding initial recurrence. Conclusions. Although not effective as a sole treatment for multiple hepatic metastases of colorectal cancer, liver resection is important in multimodal therapy. Reoperations for recurrence of metastases, followed by additional chemotherapy, frequently obtained long survival.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available