Comparative study of resection and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases

Background

We compared outcomes in patients with solitary colorectal liver metastases treated by either hepatic resection (HR) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA).

Methods

A retrospective analysis from a prospective database was performed on 67 consecutive patients with solitary colorectal liver metastases treated by either HR or RFA.

Results

Forty-two patients underwent HR and 25 patients underwent RFA. The 5-year overall and local recurrence-free survival rates after HR (50.1% and 89.7%, respectively) were higher than after RFA (25.5% and 69.7%, respectively) (P = .0263 and .028, respectively). In small tumors less than 3 cm (n = 38), the 5-year survival rates between HR and RFA were similar, including overall (56.1% vs 55.4%, P = .451) and local recurrence-free (95.7% vs 85.6%, P = .304) survival rates. On multivariate analysis, tumor size, metastases treatment, and primary node status were significant prognostic factors.

Conclusions

HR had better outcomes than RFA for recurrence and survival after treatment of solitary colorectal liver metastases. However, in tumors smaller than 3 cm, RFA can be recommended as an alternative treatment to patients who are not candidates for surgery because the liver metastases is poorly located anatomically, the functional hepatic reserve after a resection would be insufficient, the patient's comorbidity inhibits a major surgery, or extrahepatic metastases are present.     

肝切除和微波消融治疗结直肠癌肝转移的效果比较

目的 比较肝切除和微波消融（microwave ablation,MWA）治疗结直肠癌肝转移（CRLM）的疗效。方法 回顾性分析2013年1月至2020年7月98例CRLM患者的临床资料,根据治疗方法不同分为2组,肝切除组31例,MWA组67例。MWA组共治疗105个病灶,其中特殊部位病灶36个,非特殊部位病灶69个。Kaplan-Meier法绘制生存曲线,Log-rank（Mantel-Cox）检验比较两组肿瘤复发率和生存差异。χ²检验比较两组消融不完全率,单因素和多因素Logistic回归分析消融不完全的危险因素。结果 随访截止2020年10月30日,中位随访时间38（4～94）个月。肝切除组中位肝内复发时间22（95%CI 13～49）个月,明显长于MWA组9（95%CI 6～12）个月（P＜0.001）。肝切除组中位生存时间为60（95%CI 33～86）个月,也明显长于MWA组36（95%CI 30～41）个月（P=0.040）。肝切除组和MWA组1、5年累积生存率无统计学差异（100% vs97%,χ² =0.945,P=1.000;36% vs 27%,χ²=0.437,P=0.508）。肝切除组3年累积生存率高于MWA组（74% vs 48%,χ² =6.013,P=0.014）。特殊部位组消融不完全率明显高于非特殊部位[33.3%（12/36）vs 15.9%（11/69）,χ² =4.183,P=0.041]。肿瘤直径≥3 cm、特殊部位、CEA≥200 ng/mL是消融不完全的危险因素,其中肿瘤直径≥3 cm是消融不完全的独立危险因素。结论 可切除性CRLM手术切除的疗效优于微波消融,直径大于3 cm的肿瘤不宜微波消融治疗。     

The detection and management of complications following the treatment of liver metastases

While once considered as incurable systemic disease, treatment options for liver metastases have increased over the last 30 years and safety has improved dramatically, such that for a selected group of patients the hope of cure can now be offered with radical treatment, and low morbidity interventions can be offered which prolong survival, even in patients with more widely disseminated disease. Advances have been made in selection and surgical technique for liver resection and several adjuncts to resection now exist in the form of portal vein embolization, thermal ablation and targeted drug or radiotherapy delivery options. A natural consequence of these developments has been the delivery of services within fewer specialist units, with the result that later complications of therapy may present to local hospitals, rather than directly to the specialist centres. This article will describe the current common liver-directed therapies and outline the presentation and management of their complications.     

The detection and management of complications following the treatment of liver metastases

Whilst once considered as incurable systemic disease, treatment options for liver metastases have increased over the last 30 years and safety has improved dramatically, such that for a selected group of patients the hope of cure can now be offered with radical treatment and low morbidity interventions can be offered which prolong survival, even in patients with more widely disseminated disease. Advances have been made in selection and surgical technique for liver resection and several adjuncts to resection now exist in the form of portal vein embolization, thermal ablation and targeted drug or radiotherapy delivery options. A natural consequence of these developments has been the delivery of services within fewer specialist units, with the result that later complications of therapy may present to local hospitals, rather than directly to the specialist centres. This article will describe the current common liver directed therapies and outline the presentation and management of their complications.     

Synchronous resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: comparative views of colorectal and liver surgeons

Aim The optimal management of patients presenting with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases is controversial. This survey was intended to summarize the opinions of UK colorectal and liver surgeons on the specific issues pertaining to synchronous resection. Method A validated electronic survey was sent to the consultant members of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) and the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons (AUGIS). The questions were structured to allow direct comparison between the two groups of the responses obtained. Results Four hundred and twenty‐four specialist colorectal surgeons and 52 specialist hepatobiliary surgeons were identified from the register of their respective associations. Responses were obtained from 133 (31%) colorectal and 22 (42%) liver surgeons. A majority of both groups of surgeons felt that synchronous resection was a valid therapeutic option. A majority of both groups believed that synchronous resection was justified despite the options of laparoscopic surgery and enhanced recovery programmes for each discipline. Agreed possible advantages of synchronous resections were: a decrease in the overall length of hospital stay, cost and patient anxiety. The major concern about synchronous resections was an excessive overall physiological insult. Specific scenarios indicated that synchronous resection was favoured for major/complex major colorectal resection with minor liver resection or most colorectal resections not involving an anastomosis with either a minor or major liver resection. Conclusion Although significant concerns relating to synchronous resection remain amongst colorectal and liver surgeons, a majority of them felt that synchronous resections could be offered to appropriately selected patients.     

Surgical management of recurrence after resection of colorectal liver metastases

The optimal treatment for recurrent lesions after hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases is controversial. We report the outcome of aggressive surgery for recurrent disease after the initial hepatectomy and the influence on quality of life of such treatment. Forty-five (70%) of the 64 surviving patients developed recurrence after the initial hepatectomy for liver metastases. The determinants of hepatic recurrence were the distribution and the number of liver metastases. Twenty-eight (62%) of patients with recurrence underwent resection. A second hepatectomy was performed in 20 patients, and a third hepatectomy was done in 5 patients. Ten patients with pulmonary metastasis underwent partial lung resection on 14 occasions, while resection of brain metastases was performed in 3 patients on 5 occasions. There were no operative deaths after resection of recurrent disease. The morbidity rate was 28% after repeat hepatectomy, 21% after pulmonary resection, and 0% after resection of brain metastasis. The Karnofsky performance status (PS) after the last surgery was not significantly different from that after the initial hepatectomy. The 3- and 5-year survival rates after the second hepatectomy were 54% and 14%, respectively. The 3-and 5-year survival rates of the patients undergoing resection of extrahepatic recurrence were both 17%. The survival rate after resection of recurrent disease (n=28) was significantly better than that of patients (n=17) with unresectable recurrence (P < 0.05). For the 66 patients with colorectal liver metastases, the 5-year survival rate after initial hepatectomy was 50%. The distribution and the number of liver metastases and the presence of extrahepatic disease, as single factors, significantly affected prognosis after the initial hepatectomy. Multivariate analysis revealed that only the presence of extrahepatic metastasis and a disease-free interval of less than 6 months were independent predictors of survival after the initial and second hepatectomy, respectively. It is concluded that aggressive surgery is an effective strategy for selected patients with recurrence after initial hepatectomy. Careful selection of candidates for repeat surgery will yield increased clinical benefit, including long-term survival.     

结直肠癌肝脏转移的基础研究进展

肝转移是结直肠肿瘤患者预后不良的独立危险因素,本文就国外近5年来对肝转移机制研究的状况作出大体的总结:研究发现肿瘤细胞对肝血窦特异性的黏附是导致转移发生的一个重要因素.转移的过程大体可分为:脱落、黏附、入侵、生存、增生.在肝转移发生过程中,肝脏的非实质细胞与肿瘤细胞相互作用促使肿瘤生长.缺氧、炎症、免疫抑制是肿瘤微环境的特点,微环境中的各种细胞因子在肿瘤进展中发挥不可忽视的作用.     

Safety and efficacy of hepatic vein reconstruction for colorectal liver metastases

Background

Colorectal liver metastases with hepatic vein (HV) involvement may require combined resection of the liver and HV. However, the short- and long-term outcomes of such a procedure remain unclear.

Methods

We reviewed 16 cases of liver resection with major HV resection and reconstruction.

Results

The patients had a median age of 58.5 years (range, 50–74 y). In total, 18 HVs were reconstructed using a customized great saphenous vein graft (n = 10), direct anastomosis (n = 1), external iliac vein (n = 2), portal vein (n = 1), umbilical vein patch graft (n = 3), or ovarian vein patch graft (n = 1). There was no hospital mortality, and the morbidity rate was 50%. With a median follow-up period of 30 months (range, 4–89 mo), 3 patients died of tumor recurrence and 13 were alive with (n = 6) and without (n = 7) disease. Cumulative 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 93%, 76%, and 76%, respectively.

Conclusions

HV resection and reconstruction combined with liver resection can be performed safely with reasonable long-term results.     

Repeat hepatic resection as effective treatment for recurrent colorectal liver metastases

Background: Approximately 20–40% of patients who undergo liver resection for colorectal metastases develop recurrent disease confined to the liver. The goals of this study were to determine whether the survival benefit of repeat hepatic resection justified the potential morbidity and mortality. Methods: A retrospective review was performed on all patients who underwent liver resection for colorectal cancer metastases between 1983 and 1995 (N=202). Repeat liver resections were performed on 23 patients for recurrent metastases. Results: There were no operative deaths in the 23 patients, and the postoperative morbidity rate was 22%. The 5-year actuarial survival rate after repeat resection was 32%, with a median length of survival of 39.9 months. There were three patients who survived for >5 years after repeat resection. Sixteen patients (70%) developed recurrent disease at a median interval of 11 months after the second resection; 10 of these 16 patients (62%) had new hepatic metastases. No clinical or pathological factors were significant in predicting long-term survival. Conclusions: Repeat liver resection for recurrent colorectal metastases (a) can be performed safely with acceptable mortality and morbidity rates and (b) may result in long-term survival in some patients.Presented at the 49th Annual Cancer Symposium of The Society of Surgical Oncology, Atlanta, Georgia, March 21–24, 1996.     

Major hepatectomy in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases: whether or not a contraindication to simultaneous colorectal and liver resection?

OBJECTIVE: Synchronous hepatic lesions account for 15-25% of newly diagnosed colorectal cancer and its optimal timing to surgery is not completely defined, but simultaneous colorectal and liver resection is recently gaining acceptance, at least in patients with a right colonic primary and liver metastases that need a minor hepatectomy to be fully resected. METHOD: From September 2002 to December 2004, 16 patients underwent simultaneous resection as treatment of synchronous colorectal liver resection; in 10 patients (62.5%) a major hepatectomy was performed. RESULTS: The mean duration of intervention was 322.5 +/- 59.5 min, operative mortality and morbidity rates was 0% and 25% respectively; the hospitalization was 14.4 (range 8-60) days on average. Mean follow-up was 14 months and actuarial survival was 76.5% at 1 year and 63.5% at 2 years. CONCLUSION: We concluded that simultaneous colonic and liver resection should be undertaken in selected patients with synchronous colorectal liver resection regardless of the extent of hepatectomy; major liver resection, in fact, seems capable of providing better oncological results, allowing resection of liver micrometastases that, in almost one-third of the patients, are located in the same liver lobe of macroscopic lesions, without increased morbidity rates.     

Comparison between hepatic wedge resection and anatomic resection for colorectal liver metastases

Some investigators have suggested that wedge resection (WR) confers a higher incidence of positive margins and an inferior survival compared with anatomic resection (AR) of colorectal liver metastases (CLM). We sought to investigate the margin status, pattern of recurrence, and overall survival of patients with CLM treated with WR or AR. We identified 253 consecutive patients, in a multi-institutional database from 1991 to 2004, who underwent either WR or AR. WR was defined as a nonanatomic resection of the CLM, and AR was defined as single or multiple resections of one or two contiguous Couinaud segments. Clinicopathologic factors were analyzed with regard to pattern of recurrence and survival. One hundred six WRs were performed in 72 patients and 194 ARs in 181 patients. There was no difference in the rate of positive surgical margin (8.3%), overall recurrence rates, or patterns of recurrence between patients treated with WR vs. AR. Patients who had a positive surgical resection margin were more likely to recur at the surgical margin regardless of whether they underwent WR or AR. The median survival was 76.6 months for WR and 80.8 months for AR, with 5-year actuarial survival rates of 61% and 60%, respectively. AR is not superior to WR in terms of tumor clearance, pattern of recurrence, or survival. WR should remain an integral component of the surgical treatment of CLM. Presented at the 2005 American Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Congress, Hollywood, Florida, April 14–17, 2005.     

结直肠癌肝转移同期腹腔镜与开腹手术的疗效比较：倾向性评分匹配分析

目的 比较倾向性评分匹配后的结直肠癌肝转移患者同期腹腔镜手术与开腹手术的安全性及近期疗效。方法 回顾性分析2011年1月至2020年8月温州医科大学附属第一医院收治的79例行一期联合切除手术的结直肠癌肝转移（CRLM）患者的临床资料。采用倾向性评分匹配方法将开腹组患者与腔镜组进行匹配,每组纳入24例,比较两组围手术期的临床指标。结果 两组患者并发症发生率、围手术期病死率、二次手术率、术中输血率、开始流质饮食时间、腹腔引流管留置时间、术后住院时间和住院费用差异均无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。相比开腹组,腔镜组手术时间更长[（274±57）min vs（190±53）min,P＜0.001],术后肛门排气时间更短[（4（2～11）d vs 5（3～15）d,P=0.005],术后第1天白细胞计数更低 [（10.3±3.7）×109 /L vs （12.4±3.5）×109 /L,P=0.047]。结论 结直肠癌肝转移同期腹腔镜手术是安全、可行的,与开腹手术相比,具有一定的临床优势。     

Rates and Patterns of Recurrence for Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation and Open Wedge Resection for Solitary Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Introduction The purpose of this study was to compare rates and patterns of disease progression following percutaneous, image-guided radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and nonanatomic wedge resection for solitary colorectal liver metastases. Methods We identified 30 patients who underwent nonanatomic wedge resection for solitary liver metastases and 22 patients who underwent percutaneous RFA because of prior major hepatectomy (50%), major medical comorbidities (41%), or relative unresectability (9%). Serial imaging studies were retrospectively reviewed for evidence of local tumor progression. Results Patients in the RFA group were more likely to have undergone prior liver resection, to have a disease-free interval greater than 1 year, and to have had an abnormal carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level before treatment. Two-year local tumor progression-free survival (PFS) was 88% in the Wedge group and 41% in the RFA group. Two patients in the RFA group underwent re-ablation, and two patients underwent resection to improve the 2-year local tumor disease-free survival to 55%. Approximately 30% of patients in each group presented with distant metastasis as a component of their first recurrence. Median overall survival from the time of resection was 80 months in the Wedge group vs 31 months in the RFA group. However, overall survival from the time of treatment of the colorectal primary was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions Local tumor progression is common after percutaneous RFA. Surgical resection remains the gold standard treatment for patients who are candidates for resection. For patients who are poor candidates for resection, RFA may help to manage local disease, but close follow-up and retreatment are necessary to achieve optimal results. Presented at the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract 47th Annual Meeting, May 22, 2006, Los Angeles, California. White and Avital contributed equally.     

腹腔镜联合同期开放手术与全开放手术治疗同时性结直肠癌肝转移临床对比研究

目的对比腹腔镜结直肠癌切除(LCS)联合同期开放肝转移灶切除术与同期全开放切除术(TOS)治疗同时性结直肠癌肝转移(sCRLM)的临床疗效,探讨LCS联合同期开放肝转移灶切除术的安全性、短期及中长期疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2019年3月于海军军医大学附属长海医院肛肠外科行同期切除的sCRLM病人的临床病理资料,其中84例病人行LCS联合同期开放肝转移灶切除术,108例病人行同期TOS,采用倾向得分匹配方法(PSM)对两类病人进行1∶1匹配,最终LCS组(LCS联合同期开放肝转移灶切除术)和TOS组(行同期TOS)两组分别纳入69例病人,对两组病人的临床结果进行对比分析。结果所有病人无90 d内死亡病例。LCS组无中转开放手术病例。LCS组与TOS组相比,术后进食流质时间缩短[(3.54±1.43)d vs.(4.74±1.29)d,t=-5.186 P<0.001],术后住院天数减少[(8.58±4.23)d vs.(13.33±5.21)d,t=-5.880 P<0.001],并发症发生率降低[14例(20.3%)vs.33例(47.8%),χ^2=11.648 P=0.01],术中出血量[(433.77±423.45)mL vs(.422.46±292.37)mL,t=0.182 P=0.855]及手术时间[(277.54±81.88)min vs(.265.80±82.56)min,t=0.839 P=0.403]差异无统计学意义。3年存活率差异无统计学意义(60.0%vs.54.7%,χ^2=1.979,P=0.160),术后无瘤存活率差异无统计学意义(χ^2=3.542,P=0.076)。结论LCS联合同期开放肝转移灶切除术用于治疗sCRLM安全可行,相比传统同期TOS,短期疗效更优,且不影响中长期肿瘤学预后。     

Improved survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases

Background: The goal of this study was to determine if staging with intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS), assessment of porta hepatis lymph nodes, and evaluation of resection margins can improve selection of patients likely to benefit from resection of colorectal liver metastases. Methods: A retrospective evaluation was performed on patients undergoing celiotomy with intent to resect colorectal liver metastases. Patients were considered unresectable if extrahepatic disease was identified by peritoneal exploration or if IOUS demonstated greater than four lesions or the inability to achieve negative margins. Tumor-negative margins were confirmed by pathologic evaluation. Actuarial 5-year survival was calculated using the method of Kaplan and Meier. Results: Median follow-up is 25 months. Of the 151 patients undergoing operative exploration, 107 (71.0%) underwent liver resection (all margins tumor negative). Three operative deaths occurred in this group (2.8%). The disease of 30 patients (19.8%) was considered unresectable due to extrahepatic involvement, and that of 14 patients (9.2%) was demonstrated by IOUS to be unresectable. Five-year actuarial survival was 44% for the resected group and 0% for the unresectable patients (p<0.0001). Conclusions: IOUS, portal node assessment, and pathologic margin evaluation improves the selection of patients likely to benefit from resection of colorectal liver metastases. Presented at the 47th Annual Cancer Symposium of The Society of Surgical Oncology, Houston, Texas, March 17–20, 1994.     

Clinical risk scores in the current era of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases

Background

Clinical risk scores (CRS) within the context of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has not been validated. The predictive value of clinical risk scoring in patients administered neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to liver surgery for CRLM is evaluated.

Methods

A prospective database over a 15‐year period (April 1999 to March 2014) was analysed. We identified two groups: A, neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to CRLM surgery; and B, no neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Results

Overall median survival in groups A and B were 36 (2–137) months and 33 (2–137) months. In group A, nodal status, size, number of metastases and carcinoembryonic antigen levels were not found to be independent predictors of overall survival (OS). However, patients with a shorter disease‐free interval of less than 12 months had an increased OS (P = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis of high‐ and low‐risk scores compared against survival in group B (P < 0.05) confirms the applicability of the scoring system in traditional settings.

Conclusion

Traditional CRS are not a prognostic predictive tool when applied to patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for CRLM. Disease‐free interval may be one independent variable for use in future risk score systems specifically developed for the neoadjuvant chemotherapy era.     

大肠癌肝转移动物模型的研究进展

肝脏是大肠癌转移的最常见器官.为更好地研究大肠癌肝转移,建立和选择合适的大肠癌肝转移模型十分重要.在此就大肠癌肝转移模型:原位植入模型,经脾接种癌细胞,门静脉内注射,直接将癌细胞种植到肝脏的相关研究进展进行综述.     

结直肠癌肝转移的新辅助治疗

随着人们生活水平的提高以及饮食结构的改变,结直肠癌发病率呈逐年上升的趋势.约有25%的结直肠癌患者发现时即伴有肝转移.原发肿瘤联合肝转移灶一起切除能够提高患者的生存期,因此如何能够提高结直肠癌肝转移患者的手术切除率成为治疗的关键.新辅助治疗的提出为结直肠癌肝转移患者的治疗提供了新的契机.