手术治疗胃癌肝转移的预后分析

目的：探讨手术治疗胃癌肝转移的预后因素．方法：对25例患者临床病理特征及生存应用多元分析其与预后的关系。结果：20例行同时性肝切除，5例行异时性肝切除，1、3、5年生存率分别为84．0％，28．0％，21．0％。肝转移灶数目（孤立和多灶），转移灶分布（单叶和多叶），肝切除方式，原发灶组织学类型，淋巴结转移及脉管瘤栓与预后相关，多元分析显示多灶肝转移，原发灶淋巴结转移、脉管瘤栓是其预后独立危险因素。结论：对出现孤立转移灶、原发灶无淋巴结转移且无脉管瘤栓的胃癌肝转移患者应手术切除以获得更好的预后。     

外照射治疗肝转移癌研究进展

大肠癌肝转移的治疗疗效仍有待进一步提高。孤立的大肠癌肝转移手术切除是有效的治疗手段,5年生存率达30%～60%。射频消融和其他的消融技术对于远离大血管、无法手术切除的小的转移病灶治疗是可行的。遗憾的是大多数肝转移癌患者由于无法手术切除、内科禁忌和弥漫的肝内转移或肝外转移而不适于手术切除或射频治疗。对于这些患者无创和局部治疗手段显示了广阔的应用前景。适形放射治疗或射频治疗对于无法手术切除的患者是很好的局部治疗方法。     

大肠癌肝转移的治疗

目的 探讨大肠癌肝转移治疗的有效方法.方法 对大肠癌肝转移86例,在原发灶切除的基础上,分为转移灶单纯切除、栓塞化疗切除、单纯栓塞化疗和全身化疗四组进行治疗,并分析单发性肝转移癌、局限于一段或一叶的多发性转移癌、左右肝均有转移癌的不同疗效.结果 单纯切除组和栓塞化疗切除组的一年生存率,均优于单纯栓塞化疗组(P<0.05);而单纯栓塞化疗组的一年生存率又优于单纯化疗组(P<0.05).在手术切除的两组病例中,单发性转移癌术后一年生存率优于左右肝均有转移灶的术后生存率(P<0.01);而局限于肝脏一段或一叶的多发性转移癌,栓塞化疗切除组的三年生存率,优于单纯切除组(P相似文献   

结直肠癌肝、肺转移灶的手术切除

从1984年4月到1996年12月,对156例结直肠癌肝转移病人行根治性肝切除术。在中位数为20个月的随访期后,27例(17.3％)发生肺转移。行结直肠癌肝、肺转移灶切除的选择标准是:①原发瘤已完整切除;②没有肝、肺以外的其它部位转移;③对肝或肺的转移灶能完整切除。按此标准,6例做了肝和肺转移灶的手术切除。     

放射植入治疗大肠癌肝转移

肝脏是大肠癌最常见的转移部位,对它们进行同时或异时肝转移灶切除术,有可能达到治愈和长期生存。但当肝转移灶接近大血管或需要切除过多肝实质时,病人往往失去手术机会。作者对大肠癌病人不能切除的肝转移灶切除后残余灶进行了术中近距离放疗的研究。 12例病人中位年龄为61岁。所有病人都是异时肝转移,从原发肿瘤治疗到出现肝转移的中位时间是1.5年。原发灶已经得到控制。3例病人肝功能检查正常。选择不能切除或肝部分切除后有残余的病人进行近距放疗。其中8     

大肠癌肝转移癌36例报告

大肠癌合并肝转移癌发生率高 ,如何处理肝转移癌直接影响原发癌的治疗效果。关于转移癌的治疗方法有手术疗法和非手术疗法。手术疗法包括肝脏局部切除或半肝切除 ,非手术疗法包括 B超或 CT引导下无水酒精注射 ,肝动静脉置化疗泵栓塞化疗等治疗。手术疗法是治疗肝转移癌最有效的方法。本组1993年 - 2 0 0 0年治疗 36例大肠癌肝转移癌 ,现报告如下。1　临床资料本组 36例 ,男性 2 0例 ,女性 16例 ,年龄 30岁～ 74岁 ,平均 47.6岁。其中2 4例属同时性肝转移 ,2 0例术前 B超或CT检查发现 ,4例术中探查发现。 12例为异时性肝转移 ,在原发癌切…     

101例大肠癌术后肝转移治疗分析

目的比较大肠癌肝转移患者不同治疗方法的疗效。材料与方法将１０１例原发灶得到控制，无肝外播散的大肠癌肝转移患者按治疗方法不同分为３组，其中手术切除＋肝动脉化疗组４０例，动脉插管化疗＋放疗组３４例，静脉化疗组２７例。结果手术切除＋动脉化疗组１，３，５年生存率分别为６７．５％，５０．０％，２７．５％，明显高于其他两治疗组，Ｐ值均小于０．０５。动脉化疗＋放疗组的治疗有效率１，３年生存率分别高于静脉化疗组，Ｐ值均小于０．０５。结论对原发灶得到控制，无肝外播散的大肠癌肝转移患者应争取切除孤立或仅局限于一叶的多发病灶；对不可切除的病例选用动脉化疗辅助放疗不失为一重要的治疗手段。     

门静脉置管化疗预防和治疗大肠癌肝转移10例报告

一般认为腹部恶性肿瘤转移到肝脏即无治愈希望。现已证实,大肠癌肝转移并非全身性播散,较多病例在一定时间内转移仅限于肝脏,而且治疗效果均较好,对此应采取积极治疗。现将我们收治的病例报道如下。材料和方法1990年～1991年我们对4例大肠癌肝转移和6例无肝转移的中、晚期直肠癌进行门静脉置管化疗。男9例、女1例,平均年龄41岁(21岁～67岁)。肝转移组中3例直肠癌、1例结肠肝曲癌,均经手术前B超、CT证实,剖腹探查因肝广泛转移无法切除,原发灶均行切除。6例预防性用药者均为直肠癌,其中4例癌侵犯肠管近一周,深肌层、浆膜层及淋巴受侵犯。余2例癌肿侵犯肠管大于1/2周,并侵及深肌层或浆膜层,淋巴未受累,均为中、低分化腺癌。     

鼻咽癌肝转移和肺转移的放射治疗

鼻咽癌肝转移和肺转移的放射治疗邹浩元，黄国栋，李造峰我院１９８７年１月至１９９０年１０月共收治鼻咽癌肝或肺转移２０例，其中男１８例，女２例。年龄３０～６７岁。肝转移１３例，肺转移７例。原发灶经病埋确诊，均为低分化鳞癌。肝转移主要为Ｂ超诊断，单个转移灶...     

大肠癌肝转移病人的治疗策略和疗效

日本兵库医科大学第二外科的学者对大肠癌肝转移的治疗策略和疗效进行了研究。 他们对大肠癌肝转移病灶少于４个的算作可能切除的病灶,而对大于５个转移灶或不能切除的先作ＨＡＩ后再行肝切除（Ｓｅｃｏｎｄ－ｌｏｏｋ ｈｅｐａｔｅｃｔｏｍｙ,以下简称Ｓ－Ｌ）。对象和方法：（１）３７例肝切除和预防性ＨＡＩ与２８例单独肝切除对照研讨;（２）自１９９３年对不能切除的２１例肝转移病人行ＨＡＩ,１１例作Ｓ－Ｌ,肝切除之前８个月内平均给５－Ｆｕ总量为３２．１５０ｍｇ。结果：３７例中有３３例可按预定方案进行预防性ＨＡＩ,仅行…     

不同治疗方法对结直肠癌肝转移患者预后的影响

目的 探讨不同治疗方法对结直肠癌肝转移患者预后的影响.方法 对300例结直肠癌首发肝转移患者的诊治过程及肝转移后生存情况进行回顾性分析.结果 结直肠癌肝转移灶完全切除者、姑息切除者和无法切除者的肝转移后中位生存期分别为48、19和18个月(P=0.000).对于无法行肝转移灶完全切除的患者,肝转移后化疗联合局部治疗和不治疗患者的肝转移后中位生存期分别为23个月和6个月(P=0.000).一线治疗有效患者和无效患者的肝转移后中位生存期分别为24个月和16个月(P=0.000).单因素生存分析结果显示,原发肿瘤的治疗方式、肝转移灶的手术方式、肝转移后的综合治疗以及一线治疗的疗效均与预后相关(均P<0.05).多因素分析结果显示,肝转移灶的手术方式、肝转移后的综合治疗和肝转移后一线治疗的疗效是影响结直肠癌肝转移患者预后的独立因素(P<0.05).结论 肝转移灶完全切除、肝转移后进行综合治疗以及肝转移后一线治疗有效的结直肠癌肝转移患者预后好.     

肝胰病灶同步切除治疗胰腺癌肝转移的安全性及对预后的影响

目的:探讨肝胰病灶同步切除治疗胰腺癌肝转移（pancreatic cancer with liver metastases,PCLM）的安全性及对预后的影响。方法:回顾性分析盛京医院2012年1月至2017年12月收治的27例行肝胰病灶同步切除的PCLM患者的临床资料,分析影响预后的相关因素。并分别通过与27例行胰腺根治手术的无肝转移胰腺癌患者及20例行姑息性旁路手术的PCLM患者比较,评估肝胰病灶同步切除的意义。结果:对27例肝胰病灶同步切除的胰腺癌肝转移患者临床特征及治疗方式进行多因素分析,可能影响预后的变量为:肝转移灶个数、γ-谷酰胺转肽酶（GGT）。接受肝胰病灶同步切除的PCLM患者的中位生存期低于单纯行胰腺切除的无肝转移胰腺癌患者［(5.3±0.5)个月vs (12.1±0.3)个月,P<0.001］,与行姑息性旁路手术的PCLM患者相比,差异无统计学意义［(5.3±0.5)个月vs (4.1±0.1)个月,P=0.932］。肝胰病灶同步切除组的手术时间、术后感染发生率多于单纯胰腺切除组,术中出血量、术后并发症总体发生率、术后住院天数,两组差异无统计学意义;肝胰病灶同步切除组的手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症总体发生率、术后住院天数均多于姑息性旁路手术组。结论:肝胰病灶同步切除治疗PCLM可以相对安全的进行,个别患者可能从中受益,其中GGT无明显升高的孤立性PCLM患者,预后相对较好。但现阶段对预后改善有限,且并不明显优于姑息性旁路手术,不能明显提高整体生存率。     

Combined colon and hepatic resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The surgical strategy for the treatment of resectable synchronous hepatic metastases of colorectal cancer remains controversial. This study was performed to assess the outcome of combined resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases. METHODS: The perioperative data, morbidity, and survival of the patients who underwent combined colon and liver resections for synchronous colorectal liver metastases from 1988 to 1999 were compared to the parameters of the patients who underwent colon resection followed by resection of liver metastases in a staged setting. RESULTS: 198 hepatic resections were performed, of which 112 procedures in 103 patients were done for metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Twenty six patients (25%) had combined hepatic and colon resection and were compared to 86 patients with metachronous metastases who underwent colon and hepatic resection in the staging setting. Postoperative morbidity was 27 and 35%, respectively. There was no hospital mortality in the combined group vs. 2.3% in the staged group. Blood loss, intensive care unit (ICU) stay and length of postoperative stay (LOS) were similar in both groups. The 5 years cumulative survival of the group after combined surgery was 28% vs. 27% of the group after isolated hepatic resections (P = 0.21). CONCLUSION: Combined colon and hepatic resection is a safe and efficient procedure for the treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases. It can be performed with acceptable morbidity and no perioperative mortality. The survival after combined procedure is comparable to the one achieved after staged procedure of colon resection followed by liver resection.     

Surgical treatment for colorectal liver metastases--results of multi-institute study for effects of radical hepatectomy

Four hundred and ten patients with colorectal liver metastases underwent radical liver resection from 1992 to 1996 at 15 institutes were reviewed retrospectively. Survival rates were calculated for more than 5 years after hepatic resection and timing of surgery and recurrences, maximum diameter and number of liver metastases, and intrahepatic recurrence were examined. There was no significant difference in survival rates for the type of liver resection (partial or anatomical) or preoperative serum CEA levels. As for the number of metastases, the 5-year survival rate was lower for patients with over 4 metastases than those with 1, 2, and 3 metastases (p < 0.034). A significant difference in survival rates was recognized for size of liver metastases (p = 0.0309) as follows: 54.6% 5-year survival rate for smaller than 4 cm and 43.8% for over 4 cm. Overall 5-year survival rate for the 410 patients was 50.1% after radical hepatectomy. Of the 410 patients, the 153 (37.3%) patients with intrahepatic recurrence had a 5-year survival rate of 27.3%. The 5-year survival rates for patients with a metastasis smaller than 4 cm, considered to reduce the influence in the difference between surgical procedure or indication for surgery, were verified to be from 88.2% to 11.9% in each institute. This suggests that there could be a difference in diagnostic accuracy, surgical indication or timing of surgery for synchronous liver metastases in each institute.     

大肠癌伴肝转移患者的预后因素

目的探讨影响大肠癌伴肝转移患者预后的因素.方法1995年5月-1999年12月间本院外科手术治疗的64例大肠癌伴肝转移患者,部分患者全身化疗或肝动脉插管化疗,并对其临床资料进行统计分析.结果本组大肠癌肝转移患者占大肠癌患者10.2%.肝转移灶大小、术前CEA水平、原发灶切除、辅助治疗方式为影响生存的独立的预后因素.年龄、性别、肿瘤部位、分化程度、肝转移灶数目与预后无关.肝转移灶＞5cm、术前CEA＞100μg/ml、原发灶未切除的患者的生存时间(3.52月)显著低于其他患者(21.60月).结论治疗方式对肠癌肝转移患者预后影响显著,应积极切除原发灶、治疗转移灶.肝动脉插管化疗优于全身化疗.肝转移灶大小、术前CEA水平是重要的预后指标.     

结直肠癌肝转移患者生存情况及预后因素分析

目的 探讨结直肠癌肝转移患者的生存情况及其预后相关因素.方法 采用Kaplan-Meier和多因素回归分析方法,分析112例有完整随访资料的结直肠癌肝转移患者的生存情况及影响预后的相关因素.结果 112例患者的中位生存时间为18.3个月,1、2、3和5年生存率分别为60.8%、35.0%、20.3%和4.8%.单因素分析显示,患者性别、年龄、原发肿瘤部位、化疗与否、肿瘤的病理类型与患者的总生存时间无关(P＞0.05),而原发肿瘤治疗方法、肝脏转移时间、原发肿瘤大体类型、肝脏转移灶手术与否和临床分期与患者的预后有关(P＜0.05).多因素回归分析显示,肝脏转移灶手术与否、原发肿瘤大体类型和临床分期是影响结直肠癌肝转移患者预后的主要因素(P＜0.05).结论 对于结直肠癌肝转移的患者应积极切除肝转移病灶,延长患者生存时间.     

Liver resection for metastatic gastric cancer: experience with 42 patients including eight long-term survivors

BACKGROUND: The indication for liver resection for gastric metastases remains controversial and few previous studies have reported the outcome of surgery in the treatment of liver metastases of gastric cancer. The aim of this study is to clarify the effectiveness of surgical resection for liver metastases arising from gastric cancer. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on the outcome of 42 consecutive patients with synchronous (n = 20) or metachronous (n = 22) gastric liver metastases that were curatively resected. RESULTS: The overall 1, 3 and 5 year survival rates after hepatic resection were 76, 48 and 42%, respectively, and the median survival was 34 months. Univariate analysis revealed that survival significantly differed between cases of solitary and multiple metastases (P = 0.03). Multivariate analysis revealed that solitary liver metastasis and the absence of serosal invasion by primary gastric cancer were favorable independent prognostic factors (P = 0.005 and P = 0.02, respectively). All eight patients who survived for more than 5 years after initial hepatectomy had a solitary metastasis, and six of these had no serosal invasion by the primary gastric cancer. No patient with multiple metastatic diseases survived beyond 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a solitary liver metastasis are good candidates for surgical resection, whereas those with multiple gastric liver metastases should be treated by multimodal approaches.     

Curative liver resection for metastatic breast cancer.

AIMS: Hepatic resection is a standard procedure in the treatment of colorectal liver metastases. Liver metastases are frequent in breast cancer, but resectional treatment is rarely possible and few reports have addressed the results of surgical treatment for metastatic breast cancer. The aim of our study was to analyse the outcome of patients with metastatic breast cancer after resection of isolated hepatic secondaries and possibly to identify selection criteria for patients who may benefit from surgery. METHODS: Between 1984 and 1998, 90 patients with a history of breast cancer and suspected liver metastases were referred for surgical evaluation. Fifty-four patients also had extrahepatic disease or metastases from another primary tumour; multiple liver metastases were not amenable to surgical treatment in 20 patients. Five patients were treated by regional chemotherapy via an intra-arterial port catheter; after liver resection two patients were found to have liver metastases from intercurrent colorectal cancer. Thus only nine liver resections for metastatic breast cancer could be performed with curative intent. RESULTS: No patient died post-operatively after liver resection. In the follow-up period, four of the nine patients who were treated with curative intent received systemic chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 29 months, four patients died from tumour recurrence. Five patients are currently alive. Five-year survival in the resection group was calculated as 51% (Kaplan-Meier estimate). Node-negative primary breast cancer and a long interval between treatment of the primary and liver metastases appeared to be associated with long survival after liver resection. CONCLUSIONS: These observations suggest that careful follow-up and adequate patient selection could offer some patients with isolated liver metastases from breast cancer a chance of long-term survival.     

The long-term results of hepatic resection for metastatic lesions from colorectal cancer

We reviewed the clinical course of 51 patients who underwent hepatic resection for metastatic lesions from colorectal cancer between January 1984 and December 1997. The cumulative survival rate at 3 and 5 years were 57% and 43%, respectively. Sex, age, chronology of liver metastases (LM), number of LM, maximum diameter of LM, macroscopic surgical resection margin, type of hepatic resection, chemotherapy after hepatic resection, and site of primary tumor were not found to be statistically significant prognostic factors. The presence of lymph node metastases for the primary tumor was a predictor of shorter survival duration by univariate analysis (p=0.03). Recurrence was not observed in 15 patients. However, recurrence was observed in 36 patients, of which 4 were in remission by undergoing repeated resection for recurrence sites (2 were in lung, 2 were in liver). Although the long term survival of the 19 patients with no significant remarks to be noted, but no one survived with more than 4 hepatic metastases among the long term survivors.     

结直肠癌肝转移患者预后的多因素分析

背景与目的:影响结直肠癌肝转移预后的因素仍未明确,本文旨在探讨影响结直肠癌肝转移预后的相关临床病理因素。方法:选择中山大学肿瘤防治中心1996年1月至2000年12月收治的197例结直肠癌肝转移患者,分析临床病理因素与预后的关系。根据Cox回归模型的结果计算预后指数(prognosticindex,PI),并根据PI值将患者分为不同的危险组,比较各组的生存率。结果:全组总的1、3、5年生存率分别为59.04%、17.73%、11.48%。单因素分析显示,有无肝外病变、原发灶切除、肝转移瘤切除、肿瘤大体类型、血清CEA水平、肝转移瘤数目、大小、分布与结直肠癌肝转移的预后有关;多因素分析显示,肝转移瘤切除、血清CEA水平、肝转移瘤数目和大小与预后有关。根据PI值将患者分为高危组、中危组和低危组,3组的生存率两两间存在显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:肝转移瘤切除、血清CEA水平、肝转移瘤数目和大小是影响结直肠癌肝转移预后的的重要因素,对于可行肝转移灶切除的患者应积极手术治疗,以提高患者的生存率;PI值可用于结直肠癌肝转移患者的预后估计。