同时性结直肠癌肝转移患者行结直肠癌切除联合射频消融治疗的临床整体疗效研究

目的研究分析结直肠癌切除联合射频消融治疗同时性结直肠癌肝转移患者的整体临床疗效。方法本研究回顾性分析2013年1月至2016年1月本院收治的同时性结直肠癌肝转移患者45例。其中21例患者行结直肠癌切除联合射频消融治疗,另外24例患者行周期病灶手术切除治疗。观察两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、术中输血例数、住院时间、术后并发症等情况。结果 A组的术中出血量、术中输血例数、住院时间均少于B组(P0.05);A组患者术后化疗行FOLFOX方案者4例,FOLFIRI方案者3例,XELOX方案者9例;B组患者术后化疗行FOLFOX方案者5例,FOLFIRI方案者5例,XELOX方案者7例。A组患者术后1年的死亡率为38.09%(8例),B组患者术后1年的死亡率为37.50%(9例),两组患者术后1年死亡率无显著差异(P0.05)。结论对于同时性结直肠癌肝转移采用结直肠癌切除联合射频消融治疗,可以在一定程度上较少手术治疗过程的出血量及输血例数,缩短病人住院时间,与手术切除治疗组在术后1年的死亡率无明显差异,因此结直肠癌切除联合射频消融可作为同时性结直肠癌肝转移治疗备用方案,特别适用于无法行切除的肝转移病灶患者。     

个体化治疗直肠癌同时性肝转移

肝转移是影响结直肠癌预后的重要因素之一。一般认为手术切除是唯一可能治愈结直肠癌肝转移的治疗手段。而近年随着新辅助化疗与肿瘤物理消融技术以及微创技术的进展,尤其在生物一心理一社会的现代医学模式背景下,对可以手术切除的结直肠癌同时性肝转移患者如何选择更为合理的手术方式尚存在较多争议。中国医科大学附属盛京医院收治1例直肠癌同时性肝转移患者经新辅助化疗后腹腔镜下肝转移癌微波消融＋开腹结直肠癌根治性切除术的联合序贯治疗,为同类患者治疗方式的个体化选择提供参考。     

手术切除联合术中氩氦刀冷冻和无水乙醇注射治疗结直肠癌多发性肝转移

目的探讨手术切除联合术中氩氦刀冷冻和无水乙醇注射治疗结直肠癌多发性肝转移的疗效与安全性。方法回顾性分析2005年1月至2010年12月间在广州医学院附属肿瘤医院胃肠肿瘤外科接受手术切除联合术中B超引导下氩氦刀冷冻消融和无水乙醇注射的23例无法完全切除的结直肠癌多发性肝转移患者的临床和随访资料。结果本组23例患者男15例,女8例．年龄34-69（平均52．2）岁。23例患者均顺利完成治疗,98个肝转移灶中,经手术切除45个,经氩氦刀联合无水乙醇注射处理53个。肝转移灶手术时间27-96min．术中出血量50～450ml。无围手术期死亡病例：术后出现少量胸腔积液和肌红蛋白尿各1例。所有患者均接受了8～70（中位时间34）个月的术后随访,1、3、5年总体生存率分别为83．2％、45．5％和37．6％。结论对于无法完全切除的结直肠癌多发性肝转移,采用手术切除联合术中氩氦刀冷冻和无水乙醇注射治疗安全有效。     

结直肠癌切除同期射频消融联合化疗治疗肝转移

目的：探讨结直肠癌切除同期射频消融联合化疗治疗肝转移的临床疗效。方法：对39例病人先行原发肿瘤的切除，同期行射频消融联合化疗治疗肝转移，以螺旋CT增强扫描为主结合彩超综合评价治疗效果。结果：39例共82个肝转移病灶，完全坏死率85％。随访时间〉6个月者3l例，生存27例；随访时间〉12个月11例，生存8例。结论：结直肠癌切除同期射频消融联合化疗治疗肝转移的疗效较好，值得临床推广。     

腔镜下微波消融联合术后经脐静脉插管化疗治疗结直肠癌肝转移

目的探讨腹腔镜结直肠癌切除及脐静脉插管同期微波消融联合术后化疗治疗肝转移的临床疗效。方法在腹腔镜下对1I例结直肠癌肝转移行结直肠癌切除及经肝圆韧带脐静脉插管置泵,同期行肝脏转移瘤微波消融治疗,术后辅以经化疗泵介入化疗。比较治疗前后肿瘤直径大小、血供及坏死情况。结果本组治疗前CT检测转移瘤直径为（4．2±2．5）cm,治疗后为（2．5±1．2）cm,转移瘤结节完全坏死8例（72．7％）。随访时间〉6个月者10例,生存10例;随访时间〉12个月者8例,生存6例。结论腹腔镜结直肠癌切除及脐静脉插管同期微波消融联合术后化疗治疗肝转移的疗效好,值得临床推广。     

射频消融对比手术切除治疗孤立性结直肠癌肝转移肿瘤的Meta分析

目的:比较射频消融(RFA)和手术切除对孤立性结直肠癌肝转移的疗效.方法:计算机检索国内外多个数据库,收集RFA和手术切除治疗孤立性结直肠癌肝转移的临床对照试验,按Cochrane系统评价方法对纳入研究的质量进行评价,用RevMan 5.0软件对资料进行Meta分析.结果:最终纳入9个研究,共1 259例患者,其中RFA 440例,手术切除819例.Meta分析结果显示,RFA患者较手术切除患者5年生存率明显降低(P=0.02),术后总体复发率(p=0.01)和局部复发率均明显增高(P=0.003);两者在治疗直径＜3 cm的肿瘤上术后5年生存率无明显差异(P=0.43).结论:手术切除治疗孤立性结直肠癌肝转移疗效优于RFA,但肿瘤直径＜3 cm时,可考虑采用RFA.     

结直肠癌肝转移的外科治疗

目的探讨结直肠癌肝转移的手术疗效。方法1996年8月～2000年8月手术治疗结直肠癌肝转移患者31例,行原发癌与转移癌同时切除者9例,结直肠癌根治术后6月再切除肝转移灶者18例;切除肝转移灶后2月再切除原发病灶者4例。原发灶行右半结肠切除5例,横结肠切除4例,左半结肠切除7例,Dixon术12例,Miles术3例。肝转移灶行左外叶切除5例,左半肝切除2例,右后叶切除4例,右前叶切除2例,左或右肝不规则切除18例。结果全组无手术死亡。术后粘连性肠梗阻1例,切口感染3例,经对症治疗后均痊愈出院。平均随访6.4(0.5～8)年,1、2、5年生存率分别为100%、80.6%、29.0%。同期手术者与分期手术者5年生存率分别为33.3%和27.3%,无统计学差异(P>0.05)。结论对结直肠癌肝转移患者应积极争取手术切除,术后可配合其他综合治疗;对原发灶早期诊断、早期手术治疗及辅助化疗有利于防止结直肠癌肝转移。     

手术切除与射频消融治疗结直肠癌肝转移疗效分析

探讨手术切除与射频消融治疗结直肠癌肝转移疗效分析。回顾性分析结直肠癌根治术后肝转移患者43例,将患者分为射频消融组与手术切除组,分别给予射频消融及手术治疗,比较两组手术情况、术后并发症、术后3 d肝功能指标(ALT、AST、CHE、ALB)变化及3年生存率。射频消融组手术时间、术中出血量、下床活动时间、住院时间均显著低于手术切除组(P0.05)。射频消融组并发症少于手术切除组(P0.05)。射频消融组术后3 d肝功能指标改变程度显著低于手术切除组。患者3年生存率射频消融组与手术治疗组相比差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。射频消融治疗结直肠肝转移与手术切除有相同的治疗效果,具有安全、创伤较小、并发症少、恢复快等优势,是治疗结直肠肝转移的有效替代途径。     

手术切除和射频治疗孤立性结直肠癌肝转移的比较研究

孤立性结直肠癌肝转移行肝切除是一种可选择的治疗方法,近年来射频(RF)治疗结直肠癌已被较多采用,但确切治疗作用和疗效尚不明确,缺乏随机临床研究,本研究旨在对手术切除和RF治疗结直肠癌肝转移做一比较研究。病人和方法:共确诊45例结直肠癌肝转移病人,行肝切除20例,因手术禁忌     

结直肠癌肝转移瘤热消融治疗国际专家共识分享

肝转移是结直肠癌致死的最主要原因,手术切除是其首选治疗方式。然而,临床可手术切除的肝转移瘤仅占全部肝转移瘤的10%~25%,对不可切除的肝转移瘤通常采用系统化疗和/或局部消融治疗。近年来热消融技术的治疗效率和安全性日益提高,术后患者5年生存率高于单纯化疗。2013年国际消融专家组发布了结直肠癌肝转移瘤热消融治疗国际专家共识,基于射频消融相关应用的长期随访文献,总结热消融治疗在结直肠癌肝转移瘤治疗中的具体推荐及相关适应证。本文对该共识的主要内容进行介绍与分享。     

Outcome after hepatic resection versus combined resection and microwave ablation for multiple bilobar colorectal metastases to the liver

BACKGROUND: We investigated the efficacy of microwave ablation plus hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal metastases to the liver. No consensus exists concerning local ablation plus hepatic resection for treating multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases, partly because of a lack of long-term comparative survival data. METHODS: Clinicopathologic data were analyzed retrospectively for 53 consecutive patients with 5 or more bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer who underwent hepatectomy with or without microwave ablation. Outcome measures were recurrence rate, recurrence pattern, and survival. RESULTS: Combined resection/ablation was performed more frequently in patients with more liver metastases (P = .03). No significant differences were found for overall, disease-free, or hepatic recurrence-free survival between 16 patients with resection/ablation and 37 patients with resection (P = .43, .54, and .86, respectively). Multivariate analysis selected prehepatectomy carcinoembryonic antigen concentration in serum as an independent prognosticator for survival (P = .02), but not resection/ablation versus resection. In patients with combined resection/ablation, recurrence occurred near the resection or ablation line in only 2 patient (22%), whereas multiple neoplasms (>/=4) was the most common liver recurrence pattern (78%). CONCLUSIONS: Microwave ablation plus hepatic resection expanded indications for operation to treat multiple bilobar liver metastases, with survival similar to that in less-involved hepatic resection patients.     

Role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of multiple colorectal metastases to the liver

BACKGROUND: The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with multiple (five or more) bilobar hepatic metastases irrespective of initial resectability is still under scrutiny. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome of hepatectomy alone with that of hepatectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for multiple bilobar hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected from 71 patients after hepatectomy for five or more bilobar liver tumours. The outcome of 48 patients treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by hepatectomy was compared with that of 23 patients treated by hepatectomy alone. RESULTS: Patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy had better 3- and 5-year survival rates from the time of diagnosis than those who did not (67.0 and 38.9 versus 51.8 and 20.7 per cent respectively; P = 0.039), and required fewer extended hepatectomies (four segments or more) (39 of 48 versus 23 of 23; P = 0.027). Multivariate analysis showed neoadjuvant chemotherapy to be an independent predictor of survival. CONCLUSION: In patients with bilateral multiple colorectal liver metastases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy before hepatectomy was associated with improved survival and enabled complete resection with fewer extended hepatectomies.     

Effectiveness of prehepatectomy intra-arterial chemotherapy for multiple bilobar colorectal cancer metastases to the liver: a clinicopathologic study of peritumoral vasculobiliary invasion

BACKGROUND: Consensus remains to be achieved concerning prehepatectomy neoadjuvant chemotherapy as a treatment strategy for multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases, in part because the effect of prehepatectomy neoadjuvant chemotherapy has not been determined pathologically. We investigated the efficacy of prehepatectomy intra-arterial chemotherapy for multiple bilobar colorectal cancer metastases to the liver. METHODS: Clinicopathologic data for 37 consecutive patients with > or =5 bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer who underwent hepatectomy were analyzed retrospectively with respect to long-term outcome and histological findings in resected liver tumors. RESULTS: In the 15 patients receiving neodadjuvant chemotherapy (NEO+ group), liver metastases progressed in 2 patients, remained stable in 8 patients, responded more than 50% in 4 patients, and responded completely in 1 patient (combined response rate, 33.3%). Overall and hepatic recurrence-free survival tended to be higher in responders than in nonresponders ( P = .053). Microscopic invasion of the portal vein, hepatic vein, and bile ducts near liver tumors was less frequent according to use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and responsiveness to the therapy (responders, 20.0%; patients not receiving neoadjuvant therapy [NEO-], 72.7%; P < .05). Such microscopic invasion independently predicted hepatic recurrence by multivariate analysis ( P = .011). CONCLUSIONS: A neoadjuvant chemotherapy-associated decrease in microscopic vasculobiliary invasion by metastatic liver tumors was related to clinical response and favorable outcome.     

Treatment strategy for hepatic metastases of colorectal cancer

Over the past 25 years, 125 patients with colorectal liver metastases underwent 167 hepatectomies in our department. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates after the initial hepatectomy were 90%, 58%, and 51%, respectively, and those after repeated hepatectomy were 88%, 60%, and 42%, respectively. The predictive factors significantly associated with poor prognosis after initial hepatectomy were maximal diameter of metastasis (> or = 5 cm), distribution pattern in the liver (multiple bilobar), number of nodules (> or = four), and presence of extrahepatic metastases. A disease-free interval of > 6 months after initial hepatectomy was a significant factor for prolongation of survival after repeat hepatectomy. Patients with hilar node metastases at the initial hepatectomy did not receive a survival benefit from hepatectomy, while 5 patients underwent repeat hepatectomy with lymphadenectomy for remnant liver and hilar node metastases with a disease-free interval of > 8 months and 4 of them survived for > 5 years. Our treatment strategies for colorectal hepatic metastases are as follows: 1) hepatectomy is the first choice for < 4 liver metastases without extrahepatic disease; 2) a careful evaluation for liver resection is performed for patients with > or = 4 liver metastases receiving hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy because of the high frequency of hepatic and/or extrahepatic recurrence after initial hepatectomy; 3) the presence of hilar node metastases at the initial hepatectomy should be excluded from surgical indications; 4) simultaneous single metastasis limited to the lung is an indication for lung resection; and 5) a suitable indication for repeat hepatectomy for hepatic recurrence is patients with a longer disease-free interval. Aggressive surgery based on the optimum patient selection can contribute to clinical benefit, including long-term survival in patients with colorectal liver metastases.     

Treatment for multiple bilobar liver metastases of colorectal cancer

Background Recent advances have extended indications for hepatectomy to include multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Staging systems based on the biological malignancy of primary and metastatic tumors provide appropriate indications for hepatectomy in CLM. However, suitability for resection in patients with complex and extensive hepatic metastases is controversial. Methods A medline search was performed to identify papers reporting the resection for CLM. Techniques, indication, and results were reviewed. Results If the anticipated remnant liver volume is small (25–40% of total), suggesting a high risk of postoperative liver failure, portal vein embolization (PVE) is recommended prior to hepatectomy. However, curative resections are not always possible. Specifically in synchronous multiple bilobar CLM, two-stage hepatectomy, comprising bilateral hepatectomy and primary resection with or without PVE, can prevent growth of ipsilateral metastatic nodules in the remnant liver and reduce surgical risk. Several local ablation techniques can complement surgery if hepatic resection alone increases the risk of postoperative liver failure or is not curative. Chemotherapy combined with targeted treatment can suppress recurrence and extend indications for hepatectomy by reducing the size and number of primary irresectable tumors. Conclusion PVE or staged procedure combining with local ablation or neoadjuvant, downstaging or adjuvant therapies extends indications for hepatectomy to include multiple bilobar CLM. The 5-year survival rate for multiple bilobar CLM treated with alternating hepatectomy and chemotherapy is comparable to the values reported for single and hemilateral CLM.     

Diagnosis and treatment of colorectal liver metastases - workflow

In this review, standards of diagnosis and treatment of colorectal liver metastases are described on the basis of a workshop discussion. Algorithms of care for patients with synchronous / metachronous colorectal liver metastases or locoregional recurrent tumour are presented. Surgical resection is the procedure of choice in the curative treatment of liver metastases. The decision about the resection of liver metastases should consider the following parameters: 1. General operability of the patient (comorbidity); 2. Achievability of an R 0 situation: i. if necessary, in combination with ablative methods, ii. if necessary, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, iii. the ability to eradicate extrahepatic tumour manifestations; 3. Sufficient volume of the liver remaining after resection ("future liver remnant = FLR): i. if necessary, in combination with portal vein embolisation or two-stage hepatectomy; 4. The feasibility to preserve two contiguous hepatic segments with adequate vascular inflow and outflow as well as biliary drainage; 5. Tumour biological aspects ("prognostic variables"); 6. Experience of the surgeon and centre! Extrahepatic disease does not contraindicate hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases provided a complete resection of both intra- and extrahepatic disease is feasible. Even in bilobar colorectal metastases and 5 or more tumours in the liver, a complete tumour resection has been described. The type of resection (hepatic wedge resection or anatomic resection) does not influence the recurrence rate. Preoperative volumetry is indicated when major hepatic resection is planned. The FLR should be 25 % in patients with normal liver, 40 % in patients who have received intensive chemotherapy or in cases of fatty liver, liver fibrosis or diabetes, and 50-60 % in patients with cirrhosis. In patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases, preoperative chemotherapy enables complete resection in 15-30 % of the cases, whereas the value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable liver metastases has not been sufficiently supported. In situ ablative procedures (radiofrequency ablation = RFA and laser-induced interstitial thermotherapy = LITT) are local therapy options in selected patients who are not candidates for resection (central recurrent liver metastases, bilobar multiple metastases and high-risk resection or restricted patient operability). Patients with tumours larger than 3 cm have a high local recurrence rate after percutaneous RFA and are not optimal candidates for this procedure. The physician's experience influences the results significantly, both after hepatectomy and after in situ ablation. Therefore, patients with colorectal liver metastases should be treated in centres with experience in liver surgery.     

Hepatic resections for bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer

The present study was performed to assess survival benefits in patients who underwent a hepatic resection for isolated bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Thirty-eight patients underwent a curative hepatic resection for isolated colorectal liver metastasis. Among them, 11 patients had bilobar liver metastases and 19 had a solitary metastasis. The remaining 8 patients had unilobar multiple lesions. We investigated survival in two groups those with bilobar and those with solitary metastatic tumors. Survival and disease-free survival were 36% and 18% at 5 years, respectively, in the patients with bilobar liver metastases, while these survivals were 43% and 34% in the patients with solitary liver metastasis. In the 38 patients, repeated hepatic resections were performed in 15 patients with recurrent liver disease. The 5-year survival and disease-free survival rates for these patients were 38% and 27%, respectively, after the second hepatic resections. Of the 11 patients with bilobar liver metastases, 5 underwent a repeated hepatic resection, and they all survived for over 42 months. Based on our observations, a hepatic resection was thus found to be effective even in selected patients with either bilobar nodules or recurrence in the remnant liver. Received: February 7, 2000 / Accepted: April 26, 2000     

One or two-stage hepatectomy combined with portal vein embolization for initially nonresectable colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND: Portal vein embolization (PVE), proposed to induce contralateral hepatic hypertrophy before major hepatectomy, carries some negative side effects since growth rate of metastases in the future remnant liver (RL) can be more rapid than that of nontumoral liver parenchyma. Therefore, metastases in the RL should be ideally resected before PVE, and a major hepatectomy can then be performed after PVE in patients with multiple bilobar colorectal liver metastases (MBLM). The aim of this study was to assess feasibility and outcome in patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases treated by a one- or two-stage hepatectomy procedure (TSHP) combined with PVE. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From December 1996 to December 1999, 180 patients with colorectal liver metastases underwent hepatectomy. During the same period, 18 were initially considered as unresectable. TSHP combined with PVE was attempted for 7 patients (group A) among those with MBLM, and a one-stage hepatectomy after PVE was attempted in another group of 11 patients (group B) among those with non-MBLM. RESULTS: Nonanatomical resections for left liver metastases were performed as a first stage without any complications in group A. A right hepatectomy (RH) was performed in 5 patients in group A (feasibility = 71%). In group B, 7 of the 11 patients underwent a RH or an extended RH after PVE (feasibility = 64%). Postoperative complications rate did not differ between group A and B. Mortality was nil. Three-year survival rate was 53% in group A and 100% in group B. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that one- or two-stage hepatectomy combined with PVE can be applied safely to selected patients initially considered as unresectable. Three-year survival was similar to that observed in patients with initially resectable liver metastases.     

Surgical and combined treatment of multiple and bilobar metastatic affection of the liver

Short- and long-term results of surgical treatment in combination with local exposures (cryo- and thermo-destruction) and adjuvant chemotherapy in patients treated for multiple and bilobar metastatic affection of the liver were studied. Postoperative lethality was 2,5% (n=2) due to liver insufficiency. Specific for liver resection complications (bile outflow, moderate hepatic failure) do not exceed 20,5%. Five-year survival of patients with solitary bilobar metastatic affection of the liver (not more than two foci) was 39,1+/-14,3%. This demonstrates that solitary bilobar hepatic metastases is not a negative prognostic factor for surgical treatment. Long-term results of treatment of patients with multiple metastases of colorectal cancer to the liver are worse, but 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival demonstrates validity of surgical policy in treatment of these patients. Postoperative chemotherapy significantly improves long-term survival of patients with multiple or/and bilobar metastases of colorectal cancer to the liver.     

Perioperative complications after hepatectomy with or without intra-arterial chemotherapy for bilobar colorectal cancer liver metastases

BACKGROUND: We investigated perioperative complications of hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy preceding major hepatectomy for multiple bilobar colorectal cancer metastases. No consensus exists concerning operative feasibility or perioperative course in patients undergoing major liver resection with neoadjuvant chemotherapy--partly because such chemotherapy is considered hepatotoxic, increasing the risk of postoperative liver failure. METHODS: Clinicopathologic data were available for 41 consecutive patients with 5 or more bilobar liver metastases from colorectal cancer who underwent major liver resection with or without prior hepatic arterial chemotherapy. Data concerning operative feasibility, postoperative liver function, complication rates, and histologic findings in the non-neoplastic liver were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: Prehepatectomy and postoperative day 1 platelet counts were lower (P < .01 and P < .05), alkaline phosphatase on postoperative day 3 was higher (P < .01), and prothrombin time on day 1 was more prolonged (P < .01) in the chemotherapy group. No significant difference was seen between groups in intraoperative data, morbidity, or duration of hospitalization. Histologic examination of adjacent non-neoplastic liver confirmed mild to severe fatty degeneration in 91% of the patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy, compared with 53% in those without neoadjuvant chemotherapy (P = .023). Although the number of neoplasms in chemotherapy patients was greater than that of the other group, overall and disease-free survival rates were comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite mild postoperative liver dysfunction, pre-resection hepatic arterial chemotherapy did not increase morbidity.