Simultaneous versus staged resection for synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:842-850; discussion 850-852. [PMID: 19476847 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.01.031]

Synchronous resection of colorectal primary and hepatic metastasis

Up to 50% of the over 140,000 new colorectal cancer patients will present with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastasis. Surgical management of patients with resectable synchronous colorectal hepatic metastasis is complex and must consider multiple factors, including the presence of symptoms, location of primary tumor and liver metastases, extent of tumor (both primary and metastatic), patient performance status, and underlying comorbidities. Possible approaches to this select group of patients have included a synchronous resection of the colorectal primary and the hepatic metastases or a staged resection approach. The available literature regarding the safety of synchronous versus staged approaches confirms that a simultaneous resection may be performed in selected patients with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Perioperative mortality when minor hepatectomies are combined with colorectal resection is consistently ≤5%. Perioperative morbidity varies considerably following both synchronous and staged resections. However, the bulk of the existing literature confirms that simultaneous resections are both feasible and safe when hepatic resections are limited to <3 segments. Data regarding the oncologic outcomes following synchronous versus staged resections for Stage IV colorectal cancer are more limited than those available regarding postoperative morbidity and mortality. The available data suggest equivalent overall and disease-free survival regardless of timing of resection. Experience with minimally invasive combined colorectal and hepatic resections is extremely limited to date and consists exclusively of small single center series. The potential benefits of a minimally invasive approach will await the results of larger studies.

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.

Short-term outcomes after combined colon and liver resection for synchronous colon cancer liver metastases: a population study

INTRODUCTION

The timing of surgical resection for stage IV colon cancer with liver metastasis and the safety of simultaneous colon and liver resection remains controversial. The purpose of our study was to evaluate short-term outcomes after combined colon and liver resection (CCLR) versus colon resection (CR) or liver resection alone (LR) using a population database.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was used to select patients who had surgery for colon cancer from 2002 to 2006. We evaluated for in-hospital morbidity, mortality, and prolonged length of stay (PLOS). Our analysis was done using design-weighted unadjusted analysis and logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 361,096 patients during our study period (CCLR 3,625; CR 322,286; LR 35,185). CCLR was not associated with an increased risk of complications (odds ratio (OR) 1.12; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.33; P=0.21) or PLOS (OR 1.19; 95% CI 0.99-1.4; P=0.06) compared with CR. In-hospital mortality occurred in 3.5% of patients who underwent CCLR and was not significantly associated with mortality compared with CR alone (OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.79-1.74; P=0.43). Liver lobectomy with CR was associated with a PLOS and a trend toward increased morbidity and mortality. Significant predictors of complications, mortality, and PLOS included: age>70 years, male gender, nonprivate health insurance, and Elixhauser score>1.

CONCLUSIONS

CCLR with limited liver resection can be performed with similar morbidity and mortality to colectomy alone. For patients who require hepatic lobectomy, however, strong consideration should be given to a staged approach.

Irreversible electroporation therapy in the management of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients have limited options for disease control. Local ablation technologies based on thermal damage have been used but are associated with major complications in this region of the pancreas. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a nonthermal ablation technology that we have shown is safe near vital vascular and ductal structures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of IRE as a therapy in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a prospective multi-institutional pilot evaluation of patients undergoing IRE for locally advanced pancreatic cancer from December 2009 to March 2011. These patients were evaluated for 90-day morbidity, mortality, and local disease control.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients (13 women and 14 men) underwent IRE, with median age of 61 years (range 45 to 80 years). Eight patients underwent margin accentuation with IRE in combination with left-sided resection (n = 4) or pancreatic head resection (n = 4). Nineteen patients had in situ IRE. All patients underwent successful IRE, with intraoperative imaging confirming effective delivery of therapy. All 27 patients demonstrated nonclinically relevant elevation of their amylase and lipase, which peaked at 48 hours and returned to normal at 72 hour postprocedure. There has been one 90-day mortality. No patient has shown evidence of clinical pancreatitis or fistula formation. After all patients have completed 90-day follow-up, there has been 100% ablation success.

CONCLUSIONS

IRE ablation of locally advanced pancreatic cancer tumors is a safe and feasible primary local treatment in unresectable, locally advanced disease. Confirming these early results must occur in a planned phase II investigational device exemption (IDE) study to be initiated in 2012.

Optimizing clinical and economic outcomes of surgical therapy for patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, for patients with colorectal cancer with resectable synchronous liver metastases, resections were performed separately. However, the safety and efficacy of simultaneous resection have been demonstrated in selected patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes and economic implications of simultaneous and staged resections.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with resectable synchronous liver metastases treated between 1993 and 2010, constructing a decision tree comparing simultaneous and staged resections. For generalizability, the analysis was conducted from a payer perspective, using costs derived from 2010 Medicare reimbursement. Decision models incorporated the severity-refined DRG complications (complicating condition/major complicating condition) modifiers. Sensitivity analyses used alternative models of DRG reimbursement.

RESULTS

There were 144 patients analyzed. Sixty (41.7%) underwent simultaneous resection and 84 (58.3%) underwent staged resection. Median overall survival did not differ between the simultaneous and the staged cohorts (66.3 vs 65.6 months, respectively), nor did the overall complication rate (38.3% vs 40.5%, respectively). Median total length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the simultaneous cohort (8 vs 14 days; p = 0.001). In the base model, the simultaneous strategy cost less than the staged strategy ($20,983 vs $25,298 per case)--a savings of 17.1%. Sensitivity analyses examining alternative severity-refined DRG reimbursements demonstrated potential cost savings, in all but 1 extreme sensitivity analysis, ranging from 9.8% to 27.3% favoring simultaneous resection.

CONCLUSIONS

The simultaneous resection strategy was oncologically equivalent and more cost efficient for patients with primary colorectal cancer presenting with resectable liver metastases. A reduction in overall length of hospital stay was an associated benefit. Future studies should explore the feasibility and clinical implications of policies to maximize the potential for simultaneous resection in this cohort of patients.

Curative strategies for liver metastases from colorectal cancer: a review

Colorectal cancer is a very common malignancy and frequently manifests with liver metastases, often without other systemic disease. Margin-negative (R0) resection of limited metastatic disease, in conjunction with systemic antineoplastic agents, is the primary treatment strategy, leading to long survival times for appropriately selected patients. There is debate over whether the primary tumor and secondaries should be removed at the same time or in a staged manner. Chemotherapy is effective in converting some unresectable liver metastases into resectable disease, with a correspondingly better survival outcome. However, the ideal chemotherapy with or without biological agents and when it should be administered in the course of treatment are uncertain. The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in initially resectable liver metastases is controversial. Local delivery of chemotherapy, with and without surgery, can lead to longer disease-free survival times, but it is not routinely used with curative intent. This review focuses on methods to maximize the disease-free survival interval using chemotherapy, surgery, and local methods.

Current state of surgical treatment of liver metastases from colorectal cancer

Hepatic resection is the procedure of choice for curative treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CLM). Objectives of surgical strategy are low intraoperative blood loss, short liver ischemic times and minor postoperative morbidity and mortality. Blood loss is an independent predictor of mortality and compromises, in common with postoperative complications, long-term outcome after hepatectomy for CLM. The type of liver resection has no impact on the outcome of patients with CLM; wedge resections are not inferior to anatomical resections in terms of tumor clearance, pattern of recurrence or survival. Despite the lack of proof of survival benefit, routine lymphadenectomy has been advocated, allowing the detection of microscopic lymph node metastases and with prognostic value. In experienced hands, minimally invasive liver surgery is safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality and oncological results comparable to open hepatic surgery, but with reduced blood loss and earlier recovery. The European Colorectal Metastases Treatment Group recommended treating up front with chemotherapy for patients with both resectable and unresectable CLM. However, neoadjuvant chemotherapy can induce damage to the remnant liver, dependent on the number of chemotherapy cycles. Therefore, in our opinion, preoperative chemotherapy should be reserved for patients whose CLM are marginally resectable or unresectable. A meta analysis of randomized trials dealing with perioperative chemotherapy for the treatment of resectable CLM demonstrated a benefit of systemic chemotherapy but did not answer the question of whether a neoadjuvant or adjuvant approach should be preferred. Analysis of the literature demonstrates that the results of specialized centers cannot be attained in the reality of comprehensive patient care. Reasons behind the commonly poorer results seen in cancer networks as compared with literature-based data are, on the one hand, geographical disparities in access to specialized surgical and medical care. On the other hand, a selection bias in the reports of the literature may be assumed. Studies of surgical resection for CLM derive almost exclusively from case series generally drawn from large academic centers where patient selection or surgical expertise is superior to what is found in many communities. Therefore, we may conclude that the comprehensive propagation of the standards outlined in this paper constitutes a major task in the near future to reduce the variations in survival of patients with CLM.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastasis through Stoma Site at Time of Reversal of Diversion Ileostomy: A Case Report

Minimally invasive surgical techniques for liver tumors are gaining increased acceptance as an alternative to traditional resections by laparotomy. In this article we describe a laparoscopic liver resection of a metastatic lesion in a patient primarily operated for colorectal cancer. The resection was conducted as a single port procedure through the stoma aperture at time of reversal of the diversion ileostomy. Sigle incision liver resections may be less traumatic than conventional laparoscopy and could be applied in selected patients with both benign and malignant liver tumors.

Simultaneous laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous metastatic liver tumor

Laparoscopic colorectal resection has been applied to advanced colorectal cancer. Synchronous liver metastasis of colorectal cancer would be treated safely and effectively by simultaneous laparoscopic colorectal and hepatic resection. Seven patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastasis treated by simultaneous laparoscopic resection were analyzed retrospectively. Three patients received a hybrid operation using a small skin incision, 2 patients underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery using a small incision produced for colonic anastomosis, and 2 patients were treated with pure laparoscopic resection. The mean total operation duration was 407 minutes, and mean blood loss was 207 mL. Negative surgical margins were achieved in all cases. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 16.4 days. No recurrence at the surgical margin was observed in the liver. For selected patients with synchronous liver metastasis of colorectal cancer, simultaneous laparoscopic resection is useful for minimizing operative invasiveness while maintaining safety and curability, with satisfying short- and long-term results.

Impact of expanding criteria for resectability of colorectal metastases on short- and long-term outcomes after hepatic resection

BACKGROUND

An expansion of resectability criteria of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) is justified provided "acceptable" short-term and long-term outcomes. The aim of the present study was to ascertain this paradigm in an era of modern liver surgery.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent hepatic resection for CLM at our institute between 1990 and 2010 were included in the study. Ninety-day mortality and morbidity rates were determined in the total study population and in 2 separate time periods (group I: 1990-2000; group II: 2000-2010). Similarly, overall and progression-free survival rates were determined. Independent predictors of postoperative morbidity were identified at multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Between 1990 and 2010, 1394 hepatectomies were performed in 1028 patients. Overall perioperative mortality and postoperative morbidity rates were 1.3% and 33%, respectively. Although patients in group II were older, had more often comorbid illnesses, and presented with more extensive liver disease, similar perioperative mortality rates were observed (1.1% in group I and 1.4% in group II; P = 0.53). A trend toward a higher morbidity rate was observed in group II (34% vs 31% in group I; P = 0.16). Independent predictors of postoperative morbidity were: treatment between 2000 and 2010, total hepatic ischemia time of 60 minutes or more, maximum size of CLM of 30 mm or more at histopathology, and presence of abnormalities in the nontumoral liver parenchyma. Although a trend toward lower overall survival was observed in patients with significant postoperative complications, no significant differences were observed in long-term outcomes between both treatment periods.

CONCLUSION

After an aggressive multidisciplinary treatment of CLM, acceptable overall mortality and morbidity rates were observed. Perioperative mortality rates did not differ according to treatment period; however, more recently operated patients experienced more postoperative complications. These favorable short-term outcomes, without worsening of long-term outcomes, justify an expansion of the criteria for resectability in this patient category.

A standard definition of major hepatectomy: resection of four or more liver segments

BACKGROUND

While commonly used to describe liver resections at risk for post-operative complications, no standard definition of 'major hepatectomy' exists. The objective of the present retrospective study is to specify the extent of hepatic resection that should describe a major hepatectomy.

METHODS

Demographics, diagnoses, surgical treatments and outcomes from patients who underwent a liver resection at two high-volume centres were reviewed.

RESULTS

From 2002 to 2009, 1670 patients underwent a hepatic resection. Post-operative mortality and severe, overall and hepatic-related morbidity occurred in 4.4%, 29.7%, 41.6% and 19.3% of all patients. Mortality (7.4% vs. 2.7% vs. 2.6%) and severe (36.7% vs. 24.7% vs. 24.1%), overall (49.3% vs. 40.6% vs. 35.9%) and hepatic-related (25.6% vs. 16.4% vs. 15.2%) morbidity were more common after resection of four or more liver segments compared with after three or after two or fewer segments (all P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in any post-operative outcome after resection of three and two or fewer segments (all P > 0.05). On multivariable analysis, resection of four or more liver segments was independently associated with post-operative mortality and severe, overall, and hepatic-related morbidity (all P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

A major hepatectomy should be defined as resection of four or more liver segments.

Colorectal liver metastases

The diagnosis and management of CRLM is complex and requires a multidisciplinary team approach for optimal outcomes. Over the past several decades, the 5-year survival following resection of CRLM has increased and the criteria for resection have broadened substantially. Even patients with multiple, bilateral CRLM, previously thought unresectable, may now be candidates for resection. Two-stage hepatectomy, repeat curative-intent hepatectomy, and even selected resection of extrahepatic metastases have further increased the number of patients who may be treated with curative intent. Multiple liver-directed therapies exist to treat unresectable, incurable patients with adequate survival benefit and morbidity rates.

Simultaneous vs. staged resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases: a metaanalysis

PURPOSE

The optimal timing of surgical resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLMs) remains controversial. The aim of this metaanalysis was to compare outcomes between simultaneous resection and staged resection from all published comparative studies in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science, were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes following simultaneous resection with staged resection for SCLM. The metaanalysis was performed by RevMan 4.2.

RESULTS

Fourteen comparative studies comprising 2,204 patients were identified. Patients undergoing simultaneous resection were found to have similar operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD], -34.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], -81.32-12.95, P = .16) and intraoperative blood loss (WMD, -161.33; 95% CI, -351.45-28.79, P = .10). Shorter hospital stay (WMD, -4.77; 95% CI, -7.26-2.28, P < .01) and lower morbidity rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.88, P = .002) were observed in simultaneous resection group. The survival rate in the simultaneous resection group did not statistically differ with that in the staged resection group at 1 year (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.51-1.16, P = .21), 3 years (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.85-1.47, P = .43), and 5 years (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.50, P = .37) postresection, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resection is safe and efficient in the treatment of patients with SCLM while avoiding a second major operation. In appropriately selected patients, simultaneous resection might be considered as the preferred treatment. Since heterogeneity was detected, caution is needed in interpretation of the results. Better designed, adequately powered studies are required for addressing this issue.

Surgical treatment of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer

Colorectal carcinoma is one of the most frequent cancers in Western societies with an incidence of around 700 per million people. About half of the patients develop metastases from the primary tumor and liver is the primary metastatic site. Improved survival rates after hepatectomy for metastatic colorectal cancer have been reported in the last few years and these may be the result of a variety of factors, such as advances in systemic chemotherapy, radiographic imaging techniques that permit more accurate determination of the extent and location of the metastatic burden, local ablation methods, and in surgical techniques of hepatic resection. These have led to a more aggressive approach towards liver metastatic disease, resulting in longer survival. The goal of this paper is to review the role of various forms of surgery in the treatment of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer.

Is surgical resection justified for stage IV colorectal cancer patients having bilobar hepatic metastases?--an analysis of survival of 77 patients undergoing hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Surgical indication for stage IV colorectal cancer patients with bilobar hepatic metastases may be controversial.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis was performed using data of 200 patients who underwent surgical resections for synchronous metastases of colorectal cancer between 1990 and 2005. Of these, 80 patients had solitary, 43 had unilobar multiple, and 77 had bilobar metastases. Prognostic factors of the 77 bilobar metastases were evaluated using multivariate analysis. The survival was compared with that of 95 patients undergoing chemotherapy for unresectable bilobar hepatic metastases.

RESULTS

Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that the number of metastasis (≥6) [relative risk (RR), 2.7; P = 0.002] and depth of invasion (T4) (RR, 2.0; P = 0.04) were predictors of survival of the 77 patients. The survival of 11 T4 cancer patients with six or more metastases was poor, but significantly better than that of 95 patients with unresectable bilobar metastases (P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Surgical resection in stage IV colorectal cancer patients having bilobar hepatic metastases was justified in the present setting.

Simultaneous liver and colorectal resections are safe for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection (HR) is the only option offering a potential cure for patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases (SCRLM). The optimal timing of HR for SCRLM is still controversial. This study aimed to determine whether simultaneous HR is similar to staged resection regarding the morbidity and mortality rates in patients with SCRLM.

METHODS

Four hundred and five consecutive patients with SCRLM were treated with either simultaneous (n = 129) or staged (n = 276) HR. The postoperative complications were analyzed retrospectively according to the documented records and hepatectomy databases at the Gastrointestinal Institute.

RESULTS

Perioperative morbidity and mortality did not differ between simultaneous resections and staged resections for selected patients with SCRLM (morbidity, 47.3% versus 54.3%; mortality, 1.5% versus 2.0%, respectively; both p > 0.05). Simultaneous liver resections of three or more segments would not increase the rate of complications compared to staged resections (56.8% and 42.4%, respectively; p = 0.119). Meanwhile, patients with simultaneous resections experienced shorter duration of surgery and postoperative hospitalization time as well as less blood loss during surgery (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resections of colorectal cancer primary lesions and hepatic metastases were safe and could serve as a primary option for selected SCRLM patients.

Simultaneous liver and colorectal resections are safe for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection (HR) is the only option offering a potential cure for patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases (SCRLM). The optimal timing of HR for SCRLM is still controversial. This study aimed to determine whether simultaneous HR is similar to staged resection regarding the morbidity and mortality rates in patients with SCRLM.

METHODS

Four hundred and five consecutive patients with SCRLM were treated with either simultaneous (n = 129) or staged (n = 276) HR. The postoperative complications were analyzed retrospectively according to the documented records and hepatectomy databases at the Gastrointestinal Institute.

RESULTS

Perioperative morbidity and mortality did not differ between simultaneous resections and staged resections for selected patients with SCRLM (morbidity, 47.3% versus 54.3%; mortality, 1.5% versus 2.0%, respectively; both p > 0.05). Simultaneous liver resections of three or more segments would not increase the rate of complications compared to staged resections (56.8% and 42.4%, respectively; p = 0.119). Meanwhile, patients with simultaneous resections experienced shorter duration of surgery and postoperative hospitalization time as well as less blood loss during surgery (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resections of colorectal cancer primary lesions and hepatic metastases were safe and could serve as a primary option for selected SCRLM patients.

Hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases

Colorectal adenocarcinoma remains the third most common cause of cancer death in the United States, with an estimated 146,000 new cases and 50,000 deaths annually. Survival is stage dependent, and the presence of liver metastases is a primary determinant in patient survival. Approximately 25% of new cases will present with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CLM), and up to one-half will develop CLM during the course of their disease. The importance of safe and effective therapies for CLM cannot be overstated. Safe and appropriately aggressive multimodality therapy for CLM can provide most patients with liver-dominant colorectal metastases with extended survival and an improved quality of life.

Surgical treatment of hepatic colorectal metastasis: evolving role in the setting of improving systemic therapies and ablative treatments in the 21st century

Liver resection has clearly been established as the standard treatment for resectable colorectal liver metastases. This article will review the expanding role for hepatectomy in this disease. Faster and safer hepatectomies are allowing combined resections of the primary cancer and synchronous hepatic metastases. Effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy, as well as increasing data demonstrating effectiveness and safety of combined hepatectomy and ablative therapies, have further expanded the pool of patients now selected for resection. The end result is that increasing numbers of patients are undergoing acceptably aggressive surgical therapies with extension of life and possible cure. Successful multimodality therapies are also now allowing for long-term survival even in patients not cured of cancer. The prolonged survival of most patients treated by hepatectomy has allowed a long-term analysis of the patterns of recurrence, which emphasize the importance of controlling liver disease for prolongation of life. These improvements in treatments for hepatic metastases have come with a precipitous escalation of the costs of care. This will likely require that future clinical trials and algorithms of care not only be based on cancer outcome data but also on value analysis of treatment and follow-up regimens.

Update and review of the multidisciplinary management of stage IV colorectal cancer with liver metastases

Background

The management of stage IV colorectal cancer with liver metastases has historically involved a multidisciplinary approach. In the last several decades, there have been great strides made in the therapeutic options available to treat these patients with advancements in medical, surgical, locoregional and adjunctive therapies available to patients with colorectal liver metastases(CLM). As a result, there have been improvements in patient care and survival. Naturally, the management of CLM has become increasingly complex in coordinating the various aspects of care in order to optimize patient outcomes.

Review

A review of historical and up to date literature was undertaken utilizing Medline/PubMed to examine relevant topics of interest in patients with CLM including criterion for resectability, technical/surgical considerations, chemotherapy, adjunctive and locoregional therapies. This review explores the various disciplines and modalities to provide current perspectives on the various options of care for patients with CLM.

Conclusion

Improvements in modern day chemotherapy as allowed clinicians to pursue a more aggressive surgical approach in the management of stage IV colorectal cancer with CLM. Additionally, locoregional and adjunctive therapies has expanded the armamentarium of treatment options available. As a result, the management of patients with CLM requires a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach utilizing various modalities and a more aggressive approach may now be pursued in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer with CLM to achieve optimal outcomes.