Second liver resections are safe and effective treatment for recurrent hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer: a bi-institutional analysis

Hepatic colorectal metastases: methods of improving resectability

Surgery is the best treatment modality for colorectal liver metastases. When initially unresectable, hepatic resection of metastases after downstaging by chemotherapy can provide a hope of long-term survival similar to that of primarily resected patients. Definitions of resectability have evolved with the emerging principle that if metastases can be completely resected regardless of their size and number,resection should be performed as the sole mean of achieving long-term survival. Specific surgical techniques can be combined to improve resectability. If the tumor is considered unresectable, recent developments make possible to render some tumors surgically resectable. Depending on the tumor size, number and location, neoadjuvant treatments, mainly chemotherapy, can be used, followed by resection. Resection may be contraindicated if the residual volume of liver is inadequate to avoid liver failure. This may be changed either by PVE or two-stage hepatectomy, both of which use the natural regenerative capacity of the liver. Local destructive therapies such as cryosurgery and radio-frequency can also be used in conjunction with resection for patients in whom all metastases are not surgically resectable. The present use of these ablative techniques is improving the percentages of unresectable patients considered for surgery. All of the above-described methods can be combined to achieve a surgical strategy that is as curative as possible, increasing the number of patients primarily unresectable, with a long-term survival hope similar to that of primarily resectable patients. To achieve this objective, a close collaboration between oncologists, radiologists, and surgeons is mandatory, with routine re-evaluation of patients for an adequate timing of each treatment.

Intraoperative radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for irresectable liver malignancies

AIMS

To evaluate the outcome of patients who received radiofrequency ablation (RFA) at open laparotomy in patients with irresectable liver malignancies.

METHODS

Twenty-six consecutive patients who underwent explorative laparotomy and were found to be irresectable or who had been assessed not suitable for either resection or percutaneous RFA received intraoperative RFA. An expandable electrode (RITA Medical systems) was used. Follow-up comprised CT-scans in 6-12 week intervals.

RESULTS

Patients' age ranged from 35 to 72 years (median 61). A variety of pathologies were treated. In 26 patients, 88 hepatic lesions were treated: 32 with resection and 56 with RFA. The mean diameter was 4.0+/-2.6 cm with a maximum of 10 cm. In 22 patients with hepatic metastases (18 colorectal, one leiomyosarcoma, one endometrium carcinoma, one renal cell carcinoma, one malignant phaeochromocytoma) 74 lesions (median 3.4 per patient) were treated (25 by resection, 49 by RFA). Eleven patients received simultaneous resection and RFA: resection of anatomical segments in six and atypical resection in seven patients. Procedure related complication rate was 19.2%. The mean follow-up was 14.6+/-9.2 months (2-36 months). Three patients developed recurrence at the site of previous RFA indicating incomplete ablation. The overall local control rate after one year was 92 and 90.9% for patients with colorectal liver metastases, respectively. Seventeen patients (65.4%) suffered from tumour progress. In 14 patients (53.9%) tumour occurred at new hepatic localisations and in five patients extrahepatic tumour relapse was diagnosed. Twelve patients have died so far (median survival 18 months, range 4-27). Nineteen patients had either completed a follow-up of at least 12 months or died within this period, resulting in an one year survival rate of 79% (80% for liver metastases).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative RFA is a valuable tool in liver surgery which extends the surgical spectrum in cases of irresectable malignancies.

Follow-up after colorectal cancer surgery

Although most institutions offer some kind of follow-up to patients operated on for colorectal cancer, its value with respect to prolonged survival has been challenged. However, improved results of liver surgery and chemotherapy make it reasonable to assume that a follow-up programme leading to detection of more asymptomatic recurrences would result in improved survival. Liver metastases and extramural local recurrences are the most common secondary lesions and 5-year survival rates of about 30% are reported after radical resection. From these observations a survival benefit could be expected when follow-up is directed to these forms of recurrence. From six randomized studies, six comparative cohort studies and four meta-analyses it can be concluded that an intensive follow-up programme results in more recurrences being resected for cure and about a 10% higher 5-year survival rate compared with less intensive or no follow-up. However, the differences in the follow-up protocols make it difficult to conclude how a follow-up programme should be designed. Liver imaging and carcinoembryonic antigen assay should probably be included, while the yield of frequent colonoscopies is small. A follow-up regimen based on these principles is suggested. Future studies should focus on which tests are the most cost-effective for follow-up after colorectal cancer resection.

Clinical risk score correlates with yield of PET scan in patients with colorectal hepatic metastases

Although positron emission tomography (PET) detects occult metastatic disease in approximately 20% of patients with isolated hepatic colorectal metastases, it is associated with false negative results in up to 16%. We hypothesized that patients with a poorer prognosis (as defined by clinical risk score [CRS]) would have a higher yield from PET. All patients with colorectal liver metastases who were imaged by means of PET between 1998 and 2002 were identified from a prospective PET database. All patients were assigned a CRS, with one point added for each of five preoperative factors (disease-free interval <1 year, tumor size >5 cm, tumor number >1, carcinoembryonic antigen >200, and node-positive primary lesion). A total of 85 PET scans were reviewed. In half the patients (53%), PET provided no additional information over conventional imaging. Occult extrahepatic disease was detected or questionable findings seen on conventional imaging were confirmed in 20% of PET scans, whereas PET readings were inaccurate in 27%. PET findings were correlated with CRS in a subset of 63 patients presenting with a first occurrence of hepatic colorectal metastases. Among patients with a CRS of 0, no patient had extrahepatic disease detected by PET and 57% had false positive readings, whereas among patients with a CRS of 1 or more, 14% were found to have additional disease that was detected only by PET, and there were no false positive readings (P<0.001, Fisher's exact test). Patients with isolated hepatic colorectal metastases and a CRS of 0 should undergo conventional imaging alone prior to surgical exploration.

Resection prior to liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and postoperative course of liver transplantation (LT) in cirrhotic patients who underwent liver resection prior to LT for HCC.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Although LT provides longer survival than liver resection for treatment of small HCCs, donor shortage and long LT wait time may argue against LT. The feasibility and survival following LT after hepatic resection have not been previously examined.

METHODS

Between 1991 and 2001, among 107 patients who underwent LT for HCC, 88 met Mazzafero's criteria upon pathologic analysis of the explant. Of these, 70 underwent primary liver transplantation (PLT) and 18 liver resection prior to secondary liver transplantation (SLT) for recurrence (n = 11), deterioration of liver function (n = 4), or high risk for recurrence (n = 3). Perioperative and postoperative factors and long-term survival were compared.

RESULTS

Comparison of PLT and SLT groups at the time of LT revealed similar median age (53 vs. 55 years), sex, and etiology of liver disease (alcohol/viral B/C/other). In the SLT group, the mean time between liver resection and listing for LT was 20 months (range 1-84 months). Overall time on LT waiting list of the two groups was similar (3 vs. 5 months). Pathologic analysis after LT revealed similar tumor size (2.2 vs. 2.3 cm) and number (1.6 vs. 1.7). Perioperative and postoperative courses were not different in terms of operative time (551 vs. 530 minutes), blood loss (1191 vs. 1282 mL), transfusion (3 vs. 2 units), ICU (9 vs. 10 days) or hospital stay (32 vs. 31 days), morbidity (51% vs. 56%) or 30-day mortality (5.7% vs. 5.6%). During a median follow-up of 32 months (3 to 158 months), 3 patients recurred after PLT and one after SLT. After transplantation, 3- and 5-year overall survivals were not different between groups (82 vs. 82% and 59 vs. 61%).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, liver resection prior to transplantation does not increase the morbidity or impair long-term survival following LT. Therefore, liver resection prior to transplantation can be integrated in the treatment strategy for HCC.

Liver resection for colorectal metastases: the third hepatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk, the benefit, and the main factors of prognosis of third liver resections for recurrent colorectal metastases.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Recurrence following liver resection is frequent after a first as after a second hepatectomy. Second liver resections yield a similar survival to that obtained with first liver resection, but little is known about third hepatectomy.

METHODS

This study reports a retrospective analysis of 60 patients who underwent a third liver resection for colorectal metastases in a 16-year experience (1984-2000). Patients were identified from a prospective database that collected 615 consecutive patients who cumulated 883 hepatectomies (615 first, 199 second, 60 thirds, and 9 fourths). Third hepatic resections were compared with first and second procedures, in terms of risk and benefit for the patient. Prognostic factors of survival after third hepatic resection were determined by univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A third hepatic resection was attempted in 68 of 115 of liver recurrences following a second hepatectomy (59%) and achieved in 88% of the cases (60 of 68). There was no intraoperative mortality or postoperative deaths within the 2 months. Fifteen patients developed postoperative complications (25%), a rate similar to that of first and second hepatectomies. Overall 5-year survival was 32% and disease-free survival was 17% after the third resection. Survival compared favorably to that of patients with recurrence following a second hepatectomy who could not be operated (5% at 3 years) or who failed to be resected (15% at 2 years, P = 0.0001). It also compared favorably to that of patients who underwent only two hepatectomies (5-year survival, 27%). When estimated from the time of first hepatectomy, survival was 65% at 5 years for the 60 patients who underwent three hepatic resections. Concomitant extrahepatic tumor was treated in 16 patients (27%) by 11 abdominal procedures and 5 pulmonary resections. By multivariate analysis, tumor size > 30 mm for first liver metastases, presence of extrahepatic tumor at second hepatectomy, and noncurative pattern of third liver resection were independent prognostic factors of reduced survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Third hepatectomy is safe and provides an additional benefit of survival similar to that of first and second liver resections. It is worthwhile when curative and integrated into an intended multimodal strategy of tumoral eradication.

Hepatectomia direita no tratamento da metástase hepática do carcinoma colorretal

OBJETIVO: As metástases hepáticas do carcinoma colorretal, constituem-se, atualmente, em doença potencialmente curável, através dos diversos tipos de ressecções hepáticas, entre as quais se sobressai a hepatectomia direita. Os objetivos deste trabalho são analisar a evolução pré, per e pós-operatória de pacientes submetidos a hepatectomia direita por metástases hepáticas do adenocarcinoma colorretal, seu prognóstico e a exeqüibilidade de re-ressecção nos casos de recidiva tumoral hepática. MÉTODO: Cinquenta e sete pacientes submetidos à hepatectomia direita por metástases hepáticas do carcinoma colorretal com intenção curativa, entre 1990 e 2000, no Hospital Beaujon, Clichy-França, foram analisados retrospectivamente. O período de seguimento pós-operatório foi de 33±25 meses. RESULTADOS: Não houve mortalidade operatória. Em 29,8% dos casos houve necessidade de transfusão e o índice de complicações pós-operatórias foi de 57,9%. Metástases maiores que 5cm foram observadas em 59% dos pacientes e 78,5% apresentavam mais de uma lesão. A sobrevida de cinco anos foi de 43% e a sobrevida livre de doença no mesmo período foi de 23%.Recidiva hepática do tumor foi observada em 19,3% dos pacientes e destes, 45,5% foram submetidos à re-ressecção hepática também sem mortalidade. CONCLUSÕES: A hepatectomia direita é um procedimento seguro para o tratamento das metástases hepáticas do carcinoma colorretal confinadas no lobo direito do fígado, com baixa mortalidade e morbidez aceitável nos pacientes estudados. A sobrevida de cinco anos encontra-se dentro da média observada na literatura. As re-ressecções hepáticas mostraram-se exequíveis em cerca de metade dos casos de recidiva.

Prognostic factors for poor survival after repeat hepatectomy in patients with colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The recurrence rate for colorectal liver metastases after repeat hepatic resection is high, and selection criteria for repeat hepatectomy are still controversial.

METHODS

Clinical data of patients undergoing repeat hepatectomy for metastatic colon cancer were reviewed retrospectively and compared with those of initial hepatectomy and other treatments to determine criteria for repeat hepatectomy and to confirm its efficacy.

RESULTS

For 22 patients who underwent repeat hepatectomy, no mortality and an 18% morbidity rate were observed. The 3-year survival rate after repeat hepatectomy was 49%. The only poor prognostic factor after repeat hepatectomy was a serum carcinoembryonic antigen level greater than 50 ng/mL before initial hepatectomy. The prognosis for patients who underwent repeat hepatectomy and had shown high carcinoembryonic antigen levels before initial hepatectomy was approximately equal to that for the patients who received systemic chemotherapy or hepatic arterial infusion for unresectable tumors in the remnant liver.

CONCLUSION

Repeat hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases can be performed safely and appears to be as effective as initial hepatectomy. However, for patients with a carcinoembryonic antigen level greater than 50 ng/mL before the initial hepatectomy, repeat hepatic resection alone may not be as effective, and a new strategy is needed.

Current treatment for liver metastases from colorectal cancer

The liver is the commonest site of distant metastasis of colorectal cancer and nearly half of the patients with colorectal cancer ultimately develop liver involved during the course of their diseases. Surgery is the only therapy that offers the possibility of cure for patients with hepatic metastatic diseases. Five-year survival rates after resection of all detectable liver metastases can be up to 40%. Unfortunately, only 25% of patients with colorectal liver metastases are candidates for liver resection, while the others are not amenable to surgical resection. Regional therapies such as radiofrequency ablation and cryotherapy may be offered to patients with isolated unresectable metastases but no extrahepatic diseases. Hepatic artery catheter chemotherapy and chemoembolization and portal vein embolization are often used for the patients with extensive liver metastases but without extrahepatic diseases, which are not suitable for regional ablation. For the patients with metastatic colorectal cancer beyond the liver, systemic chemotherapy is a more appropriate choice. Immunotherapy is also a good option when other therapies are used in combination to enhance the efficacy. Selective internal radiation therapy is a new radiation method which can be used in patients given other routine therapies without effects.