Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao World Journal of Sur...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
World Journal of Surgery
Article . 1995 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Resection of colorectal liver metastases

Authors: J, Scheele; R, Stang; A, Altendorf-Hofmann; M, Paul;

Resection of colorectal liver metastases

Abstract

AbstractFrom 1960 to 1992 a total of 1718 patients with liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma were recorded. Of these patients, 469 (27.3%) underwent hepatic resection, which was performed with curative intent in 434 patients (25.3%). Operative mortality in this group was 4.4%, being 1.8% (2 of 114) during the last 3 years. Significant morbidity was observed in 16% of patients with a decrease to 5% (6 of 112) for the last 3 years. A 99.8% follow‐up until November 1, 1993 was achieved. Excluding operative mortality, there are 350 patients with “potentially curative” resection and 65 corresponding patients with minimal macroscopic (n=19) or microscopic (n=46) residual disease. The latter group demonstrated a poor prognosis, with median and maximum survival times of 14.4 and 56.0 months, respectively. Among the 350 patients having potentially curative resection, the actuarial 5‐, 10‐, and 20‐year survivals were 39.3%, 23.6%, and 17.7%, respectively. Tumor‐free survival was 33.6% at 5 years. In the univariate analysis, the following factors were associated with decreased crude survival: presence and extent of mesenteric lymph node involvement (p=0.0001); grade III/IV primary tumor (p=0.013); synchronous diagnosis of metastases (p=0.014); satellite metastases (p=0.00001); metastasis diameter of>5 cm (p=0.003); preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) elevation (p=0.03); limited resection margins (p=0.009); extrahepatic disease (p=0.009); and nonanatomic procedures (p=0.008). With respect to disease‐free survival, extrahepatic disease (p=0.09) failed to achieve statistical significance, whereas patients with primary tumors in the colon did significantly better than those with rectal cancer (p=0.04). The presence of five or more independent metastases adversely affected resectability (p<0.05). However, once a radical excision of all detectable disease was achieved, no significant predictive value of an increasing number of metastases (1–3 versus≥4) on either overall (p=0.40) or disease‐free (p=0.64) survival was found. Using Cox's multivariate regression analysis, the presence of satellite metastases, primary tumor grade, the time of metastasis diagnosis diameter of the largest metastasis, anatomic versus nnanatomic approach, year of resection, and mesenteric lymph node involvement each independently affected both crude and tumor‐free survival.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Aged, 80 and over, Male, Liver Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Survival Rate, Postoperative Complications, Actuarial Analysis, Lymphatic Metastasis, Hepatectomy, Humans, Lymph Node Excision, Female, Colorectal Neoplasms, Aged, Follow-Up Studies, Neoplasm Staging

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    1K
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 0.01%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
1K
Top 1%
Top 0.01%
Top 1%
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!