Simultaneous versus staged liver resection of synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer

Surgical Resection in Colorectal Liver Metastasis: An Umbrella Review

Surgical resection is the gold standard for treating synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). The resection of the primary tumor and metastatic lesions can follow different sequences: "simultaneous", "bowel-first", and "liver-first". Conservative approaches, such as parenchymal-sparing surgery and segmentectomy, may serve as alternatives to major hepatectomy. A comprehensive search of Medline, Epistemonikos, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Studies evaluating patients who underwent surgery for CRLM and reported survival results were included. Other secondary outcomes were analyzed, including disease-free survival, perioperative complications and mortality, and recurrence rates. Quality assessment was performed using the AMSTAR-2 method. No significant differences in overall survival, disease-free survival, and secondary outcomes were observed when comparing simultaneous to "bowel-first" resections, despite a higher rate of perioperative mortality in the former group. The 5-year OS was significantly higher for simultaneous resection compared to "liver-first" resection. No significant differences in OS and DFS were noted when comparing "liver-first" to "bowel-first" resection, or anatomic to non-anatomic resection. Our umbrella review validates simultaneous surgery as an effective oncological approach for treating SCRLM, though the increased risk of perioperative morbidity highlights the importance of selecting suitable patients. Non-anatomic resections might be favored to preserve liver function and enable future surgical interventions.

Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy is important for improving long-term survival in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases undergoing simultaneous resection

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A growing number of studies have demonstrated that neoadjuvant chemotherapy can improve the prognosis of patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). However, the routine use of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (POAC) for patients with CRLM after simultaneous resection remains controversial. This retrospective study investigated the impact of POAC on outcomes in patients with CRLM who underwent simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer tumors and liver metastases using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

METHODS

From January 2009 to November 2020, patients with CRLM who underwent simultaneous resection were retrospectively enrolled. The confounding factors and selection bias were adjusted by 2:1 PSM. Patients were stratified into the POAC and non-POAC groups. Kaplan-Meier curves were utilized to compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between the groups. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to identify independent clinicopathological factors before and after PSM analysis. The utility of the model was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and calibration curves after PSM analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 478 patients with resectable CRLM were enrolled and assigned to the POAC (n = 212, 60.9%) or non-POAC group (n = 136, 39.1%). After 2:1 PSM, there was no significant bias between the groups. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a significant effect of POAC on OS (P < 0.001) but not PFS. Multivariate Cox regression analysis identified T stage (T3-T4), lymph node metastasis, radiofrequency ablation during surgery, operative time ≥ 325 min, and the receipt of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.447, 95% confidence interval = 0.312-0.638, P < 0.001) as independent prognostic factors for OS. The areas under the ROC curves for the nomogram model for predicting 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival were 0.653, 0.628, and 0.678, respectively. Subgroups analysis suggested that POAC can enhance OS in patients with resectable CRLM with either low (1-2, P < 0.001) or high clinical risk scores (3-5, P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, this study identified POAC as a prognostic factor to predict OS in patients with CRLM undergoing simultaneous resection.

Multimodal treatment of rectal cancer with resectable synchronous liver metastases: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Specific studies on stage IV rectal cancer are lacking. The aim of this study is to describe the current status of rectum-first approach (RFA), liver-first approach (LFA) and simultaneous approach (SA) in these patients.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed on PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane including studies published from January 2005 to January 2021. Studies on colon cancer only, colon and rectal cancer without distinction, extrahepatic metastases at diagnosis, or case reports/letters were excluded. Main outcomes were 5-yr overall survival (OS) and treatment completion rates.

RESULTS

22 studies were included for a total of 1,653 patients. 77% of the studies were retrospective and mainly (59%) reported one treatment approach. The primary endpoint was declared in 27% of the studies. Irrespective of treatment approaches, the 5-yr OS rate was reported in 72% of the studies. The 5-yr OS rates ranged from 38.5% to 75% for LFA, from 28% and 80% for RFA and from 28.2% to 77.3% for SA. Treatment completion rates ranged from 50% to 100% for LFA, from 37% to 100% for RFA, and from 66% to 100% for SA.

CONCLUSION

The wide heterogeneity of the results reflects that the therapeutic strategy in this setting is a case-by-case multidisciplinary decision and depends on several patient-specific features.

Simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: what determines the risk of unfavorable outcomes? An international multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The use of a simultaneous resection (SIMR) in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM) has increased over the past decades. However, it remains unclear when a SIMR is beneficial and when it should be avoided. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was therefore to compare the outcomes of a SIMR for sCRLM in different settings, and to assess which factors are independently associated with unfavorable outcomes.

METHODS

To perform this retrospective cohort study, patients with sCRLM undergoing SIMR (2004-2019) were extracted from an international multicenter database, and their outcomes were compared after stratification according to the type of liver and colorectal resection performed. Factors associated with unfavorable outcomes were identified through multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 766 patients were included, encompassing colorectal resections combined with a major liver resection (n=122), minor liver resection in the anterolateral (n=407), or posterosuperior segments ('Technically major', n=237). Minor and technically major resections, compared to major resections, were more often combined with a rectal resection (29.2 and 36.7 vs. 20.5%, respectively, both P=0.003) and performed fully laparoscopic (22.9 and 23.2 vs. 6.6%, respectively, both P = 0.003). Major and technically major resections, compared to minor resections, were more often associated with intraoperative transfusions (42.9 and 38.8 vs. 20%, respectively, both P = 0.003) and unfavorable incidents (9.6 and 9.8 vs. 3.3%, respectively, both P≤0.063). Major resections were associated, compared to minor and technically major resections, with a higher overall morbidity rate (64.8 vs. 50.4 and 49.4%, respectively, both P≤0.024) and a longer length of stay (12 vs. 10 days, both P≤0.042). American Society of Anesthesiologists grades ≥3 [adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 1.671, P=0.015] and undergoing a major liver resection (aOR: 1.788, P=0.047) were independently associated with an increased risk of severe morbidity, while undergoing a left-sided colectomy was associated with a decreased risk (aOR: 0.574, P=0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

SIMR should primarily be reserved for sCRLM patients in whom a minor or technically major liver resection would suffice and those requiring a left-sided colectomy. These findings should be confirmed by randomized studies comparing SIMR with staged resections.

Safety and long-term prognosis of simultaneous versus staged resection in synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimal time point for surgical resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLMs) is still controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the safety and long-term prognoses of simultaneous and staged resection of SCLM to provide a reference for clinical selection.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for studies published by October 2022 was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. The evaluated outcome parameters were total, gastrointestinal and hepatic complications, as well as perioperative mortality, intraoperative blood loss, total hospital stay, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 22 nonrandomised and one randomised study comprising 4862 patients. The patients undergoing simultaneous resection of SCLM had similar total (OR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.66-1.19], P = 0.409), gastrointestinal (OR = 1.19, 95% CI [0.89-1.59], P = 0.241) and hepatic (OR = 1.04, 95% CI [0.83-1.31], P = 0.734) complications, as well as perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79, 95% CI [0.88-3.64], P = 0.108), 5-year DFS (HR = 1.26, 95% CI [0.96-1.66], P = 0.098) and 5-year OS (HR = 1.13, 95% CI [0.95-1.34], P = 0.164). Lower intraoperative blood loss (SMD = - 0.39, 95% CI [- 0.60 to - 0.18], P < 0.001) and shorter total hospital stay (WMD = - 5.43, 95% CI [- 7.29 to - 3.58], P < 0.001) were observed in the simultaneous-resection group versus the staged group.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resection is safe and effective for SCLM patients. The long-term prognosis is equivalent to that of the traditional staged resection. Correct selection of resectable SCLM patients for the simultaneous resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases can be the first choice. Owing to the potential heterogeneity, more RCTs should be included to verify our conclusions.

Simultaneous or staged resection of synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases: a 13-year institutional follow-up

BACKGROUND

This study compared postoperative outcomes and survival rates of patients who underwent simultaneous or staged resection for synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases.

METHODS

Between 2005 and 2018, 126 patients were registered prospectively at a university hospital in Sweden, 63 patients who underwent simultaneous resection were matched against 63 patients who underwent staged resection.

RESULTS

The length of hospital stay was shorter for the simultaneous resection group, at 11 vs 16 days, p = <0.001. Fewer patients experienced recurrence in the simultaneous resection group 39 vs 50 patients, p = 0.012. There were no significant differences in disease-free survival and overall survival between the groups. Age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.72; 95% CI 1.01-2.94; p = 0.049) and Clavien-Dindo score (HR 2.22; 95% CI 1.06-4.67; p = 0.035) had impact on survival.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases can be resected simultaneously, and enables a shorter treatment time without jeopardizing oncological outcomes.

Simultaneous versus staged major hepatectomy (≥3 liver segments) for outcomes of synchronous colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hepatectomy is an effective treatment for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) patients. However, whether to choose simultaneous hepatectomy (SIH) or staged hepatectomy (STH) is still controversial, especially during major hepatectomy (≥3 liver segments).

Aims

Compare the difference between the SCLM patients underwent SIH and STH, especially during major hepatectomy (≥3 liver segments).

Methods and Results

A meta‐analysis was conducted by analyzing the published data on the outcomes of SCLM patients underwent SIH or STH from January 2010 to December 2020 from the electronic databases. A random‐effects model was used to derive pooled estimates of odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the explored outcomes. Eventually, 18 studies, including 5101 patients, were included this study. The result of meta‐analysis showed that SIH did not increase postoperative complications (pooled OR: 1.037; 95% CI: 0.897–1.200), perioperative mortality (pooled OR: 0.942; 95% CI: 0.552–1.607), 3‐year mortality (pooled OR: 1.090; 95% CI: 0.903–1.316) or 5‐year mortality (pooled OR: 1.077; 95% CI: 0.926–1.253), as compared with STH. Subgroup analysis showed that, simultaneous major hepatectomy (SIMH) also did not increase postoperative complications (pooled OR: 0.863; 95% CI: 0.627–1.188) or perioperative mortality (pooled OR: 0.689; 95% CI: 0.290–1.637) as compared with staged major hepatectomy (STMH).

Conclusion

Postoperative complications, perioperative mortality and long‐term prognosis had no significant difference between SIH and STH for SCLM patients. Besides, postoperative complications and perioperative mortality also had no significant difference between SIMH and STMH.

Which surgical strategy for colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases provides the best outcome? A comparison between primary first, liver first and simultaneous approach

BACKGROUND

There is no clear consensus about the best surgical strategy for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous liver metastases (SCRLM).

METHODS

Between 2009 and 2019, patients with CRC and SCRLM considered for curative treatment were included. Perioperative and follow-up data were analysed to examine the safety and survival outcomes of primary first (PF), liver first (LF) and simultaneous resection (SR) strategies.

RESULTS

204 patients were identified, consisting of PF (n = 129), LF (n = 26) and SR (n = 49). Forty-five patients (22.1%) failed to have either the primary or the liver metastases resected following initial LF (n = 11, 42.3%) or PF (n = 34, 26.4%), respectively (p < 0.001). The postoperative morbidity rates were 31.0%, 38.4% and 40.8% in PF, LF and SR group, respectively (p = 0.409); the mortality rates were 2.3%, 0% and 4.1%, respectively (p = 0.547). The 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) were 94%, 72%, 53% in the PF group, 74%, 54%, 36% in the LF group, and 91%, 74%, 63% in the SR group. LF group had the worst OS compared to PF and SR (p = 0.040, p = 0.052). The 1-, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) were 31%, 15%, 10% in PF, 21%, 9% and 9% in LF and 45%, 28% and 28% in SR group, respectively. SR group had a better DFS compared to PF and LF (p = 0.005, p = 0.008). At the multivariate analysis, there was no difference between the three strategies in terms of OS (PF vs SR OS-HR 1.090, p = 0.808; LF vs SR OS-HR 1.582, p = 0.365) and the PF had a worse DFS compared to the SR approach (PF vs SR DFS-HR 1.803, p = 0.007; LF vs SR DFS-HR 1.252, p = 0.492).

CONCLUSIONS

PF, LF and SR had comparable postoperative morbidity and mortality. The three surgical strategies had similar OS outcomes. The PF strategy was associated with a worse DFS than SR, while the LF approach was associated with a high failure rate to progress to the second stage (primary tumour resection).

Management of Colorectal Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: An Inception Cohort Study (CoSMIC)

BACKGROUND

Approximately one-fifth of patients with colorectal cancer present with hepatic metastases. There are limited prospective data on the outcomes of synchronous combined liver and bowel surgery and liver-first or bowel-first routes where contemporary chemo(radio)therapy is integrated into management.

METHODS

Between 1 April 2014 and 31 March 2017, 125 patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases were recruited. Data are reported on pathway-specific outcomes, including perioperative complications, treatment completion, and overall and disease-free survival. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02456285).

RESULTS

There was no difference in age, body mass index, or Charlson score between surgical groups. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was used in 50 (40%) patients for a mean duration of 4.6 months (standard deviation [SD] 5.4), and mean time from completion of chemotherapy to surgery was 2.6 months (SD 1.9). Complications were similar between patients completing the synchronous and staged pathways (p = 0.66). Mean total inpatient stay was 16.5 days (SD 8.1) for staged surgery compared with 16.8 days (SD 10.3) for the synchronous group (t-test; p = 0.91). There was no difference in time to treatment completion between pathways. Thirty six (35%) patients were disease-free at 12 months, with no significant difference between groups (Chi-square, p = 0.448). Quality of life was similar in all surgical groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative complications and oncological and healthcare occupancy outcomes are equivalent between patients completing staged and synchronous pathways for the management of patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases. Future studies should focus on optimizing the criteria for pathway selection, incorporation of cancer genomics data, and patient (user) preferences.

Oligometastasis scoring system for predicting survival of patients with colorectal liver metastasis after hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Oligometastasis, the presence of a small number of resectable metastatic tumors, usually has favorable outcomes. Here we examined whether the novel oligometastatic score (OLGS), which divides the number of colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) by the time from colorectal resection to liver recurrence, better predicts CRLM patient survival than the commonly used clinical risk score.

METHODS

A total of 143 patients who underwent curative hepatectomy for CRLMs between 2007 and 2018 were analyzed. We investigated their clinical characteristics and outcomes using OLGS.

RESULTS

Of the 143 CRLM patients, 70 had synchronous CRLMs and 73 had metachronous CRLMs. Patients with metachronous CRLMs were divided into OLGS-low (n = 59) and OLGS-high (n = 14) subgroups. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates after hepatectomy differed significantly between the subgroups (p < .001). In the multivariate Cox model, a high OLGS was an independent predictor of 5-year OS (p < .001), and the hazard ratio (HR) of the OLGS-high group (HR = 7.171) was higher than that of the high clinical risk score group (HR = 4.337).

CONCLUSION

The OLGS, a simple and handy scoring system, better predicts the 5-year OS of patients with CRLMs after hepatectomy and warrants prospective validation.

Preoperative nomogram to predict survival following colorectal cancer liver metastasis simultaneous resection

Background

Simultaneous resection for patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) remains an optimal option for the sake of curability. However, few studies so far focus on outcome of this subgroup of patients (who receive simultaneous resection for CRLM). Substantial heterogeneity exists among such patients and more precise categorization is needed preoperatively to identify those who may benefit more from surgery. In this study, we formulated this internally validated scoring system as an option.

Methods

Clinicopathological and follow-up data of 234 eligible CRLM patients undergoing simultaneous resection from January 2010 to March 2019 in our center were included for analysis. Patients were randomized to either a training or validation cohort. We performed multivariable Cox regression analysis to determine preoperative factors with prognostic significance using data in training cohort, and a nomogram scoring system was thus established. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration plot were adopted to evaluate the predictive power of our risk model.

Results

In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, five factors including presence of node-positive primary defined by enhanced CT/MR, preoperative CEA level, primary tumor location, tumor grade and number of liver metastases were identified as independent prognostic indicators of overall survival (OS) and adopted to formulate the nomogram. In the training cohort, calibration plot graphically showed good fitness between estimated and actual 1- and 3-year OS. Time-dependent ROC curve by Kaplan-Meier method showed that our nomogram model was superior to widely used Fong's score in prediction of 1- and 3-year OS (AUC 0.702 vs. 0.591 and 0.848 vs. 0.801 for 1- and 3-year prediction in validation cohort, respectively). Kaplan-Meier curves for patients stratified by the assessment of nomogram showed great discriminability (P<0.001).

Conclusions

In this retrospective analysis we identified several preoperative factors affecting survival of synchronous CRLM patients undergoing simultaneous resection. We also constructed and validated a risk model which showed high accuracy in predicting 1- and 3-year survival after surgery. Our risk model is expected to serve as a predictive tool for CRLM patients receiving simultaneous resection and assist physicians to make treatment decision.

Simultaneous versus staged colorectal and hepatic resections for colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases: a meta-analysis of outcomes and clinical characteristics

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the comparative outcomes and clinical characteristics of simultaneous and staged colorectal and hepatic resections for colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of electronic information sources, and bibliographic reference lists. Perioperative morbidity and mortality, anastomotic leak, wound infection, bile leak, bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, sub-phrenic abscess, reoperation, recurrence, 5-year overall survival, procedure time, and length of hospital stay were the evaluated outcome parameters. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using random-effects model.

RESULTS

We identified 41 comparative studies reporting a total of 12,081 patients who underwent simultaneous (n = 5013) or staged (n = 7068) resections for colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases. There were significantly lower use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.003), higher right-sided colonic resections (p < 0.00001), and minor hepatic resections (p < 0.00001) in the simultaneous group. The simultaneous resection was associated with significantly lower rate of bleeding (OR 0.60, p = 0.03) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD - 5.40, p < 0.00001) compared to the staged resection. However, no significant difference was found in perioperative morbidity (OR1.04, p = 0.63), mortality (RD 0.00, p = 0.19), anastomotic leak (RD 0.01, p = 0.33), bile leak (OR 0.83, p = 0.50), wound infection (OR 1.17, p = 0.19), intra-abdominal abscess (RD 0.01, p = 0.26), sub-phrenic abscess (OR 1.26, p = 0.48), reoperation (OR 1.32, p = 0.18), recurrence (OR 1.33, p = 0.10), 5-year overall survival (OR 0.88, p = 0.19), or procedure time (MD - 23.64, p = 041) between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite demonstrating nearly comparable outcomes, the best available evidence (level 2) regarding simultaneous and staged colorectal and hepatic resections for colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases is associated with major selection bias. It is time to conduct high-quality randomised studies with respect to burden and laterality of disease. We recommend the staged approach for complex cases.

Surgical treatment of stage IV colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The ideal treatment approach for colorectal cancer (CRC) with synchronous liver metastases (SCRLM) remains debated. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) comparing the 'bowel-first' approach (BFA), simultaneous resection (SIM), and the 'liver-first' approach (LFA).

METHODS

A systematic search of comparative studies in CRC with SCRLM was undertaken using the Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases. Outcome measures included postoperative complications, 30- and 90-day mortality, chemotherapy use, treatment completion rate, 3- and 5-year recurrence-free survival, and 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS). Pairwise and network meta-analysis were performed to compare strategies. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I² statistic.

RESULTS

One prospective and 43 retrospective studies reporting on 10 848 patients were included. Patients undergoing the LFA were more likely to have rectal primaries and a higher metastatic load. The SIM approach resulted in a higher risk of major morbidity and 30-day mortality. Compared to the BFA, the LFA more frequently resulted in failure to complete treatment as planned (34% versus 6%). Pairwise and network meta-analysis showed a similar 5-year OS between LFA and BFA and a more favorable 5-year OS after SIM compared to LFA (odds ratio 0.25-0.90, p = 0.02, I² = 0%), but not compared to BFA.

CONCLUSION

Despite a higher tumor load in LFA compared to BFA patients, survival was similar. A lower rate of treatment completion was observed with LFA. Uncertainty remains substantial due to imprecise estimates of treatment effects. In the absence of prospective trials, treatment of stage IV CRC patients should be individually tailored.

Comparison of sequential, delayed and simultaneous resection strategies for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

Background

The present study aimed to compare the perioperative safety and long-term survival of patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases undergoing sequential resection (SeR), delayed resection (DeR) and simultaneous resection (SiR).

Methods

From January 2007 to December 2016, data from patients undergoing surgery at Peking University Cancer Hospital for synchronous colorectal liver metastases were retrospectively collected. The above three different surgical strategies were compared.

Results

A total of 233 cases were included, with 49 in the SeR group, 98 in the DeR group and 86 in the SiR group. The incidence of severe complications was 26.7% in the SiR group, higher than that in the DeR group (11.2%, P = 0.007) and the SeR group (16.3%, P = 0.166). The overall survival at 1 and 3 years in the SeR group (93.9 and 50.1%) was lower than that in the DeR group (94.9 and 64.8%, P = 0.019), but not significantly different from that in the SiR group (93.0 and 55.2%, P = 0.378). Recurrence-free survival at 1 and 3 years in the SeR group (22.4 and 18.4%) was lower than that in the DeR group (43.9 and 24.2%, P = 0.033) but not significantly different from that in the SiR group (31.4 and 19.6%, P = 0.275). Cox multivariate analysis indicated that T4, lymph node-positive primary tumour, liver metastases > 30 mm and SiR (compared with DeR) were correlated with poor prognosis.

Conclusion

Simultaneous resection has a relatively higher incidence of severe complications, and with a staged resection strategy, the prognosis of delayed resection was better than that of sequential resection.

Simultaneous, Delayed and Liver-First Hepatic Resections for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that compare simultaneous, delayed and liver-first approach for synchronous colorectal liver metastases have found no significant differences. The aim of this study was to determine the best treatment strategy on the basis of effect sizes and the probabilities of treatment ranking by using a network meta-analysis. Moreover, first-time pairwise and network meta-analyses were used to estimate the existing evidence, and their results were compared to detect any discrepancies between them.

Methods

Systematic review, pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed. The primary and secondary outcomes were 5-year overall survival and postoperative major morbidity, respectively.

Results

No significant differences in long-term survival and major morbidity were found amongst the three approaches. The hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for 5-year overall survival for the simultaneous, delayed and liver-first approaches were 0.93 (0.69 - 1.24, P = 0.613), 0.97 (0.87 - 1.07, P = 0.596) and 0.90 (0.67 - 1.22, P = 0.499), respectively. Moreover, the liver-first approach with a surface under the cumulative ranking area score of 89% was ranked as the potentially best treatment option based on probabilities of treatment ranking.

Conclusions

On the basis of the relative ranking of treatments, the liver-first approach ranked first, followed by the delayed and simultaneous approaches. Therefore, a three-arm randomized controlled trial that compares the liver-first, simultaneous and delayed approaches needs to shed further light as to which is the best treatment option.

Population level outcomes and costs of single stage colon and liver resection versus conventional two-stage approach for the resection of metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The objective of the current study was to compare outcomes among patients combined colon (CR) and liver resection (LR) for the treatment of simultaneous colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) versus patients undergoing two-stage CR and LR.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgery for CRLM between 2004 and 2014 were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Propensity-score matching was used to compare patients undergoing CR + LR with patients undergoing two-stage CR and LR.

RESULTS

Among 83,410 patients, CR + LR was performed in 5659 (6.7%), stage C + LR was performed in 5659 (6.7%), while isolated CR and LR was performed in 70,177 (84.0%) and 7574 (9.3%) patients, respectively. The number of patients undergoing CR + LR increased from 423 in 2004 to 580 in 2014 (Δ = +37%). Patients undergoing CR + LR had lower postoperative morbidity (CR + LR vs. two-staged CR and LR: 38.5% vs. 61.2%), shorter LOS (median LOS: 8 days [IQR: 7-12] vs. 14 days [IQR: 10-21]), and lower postoperative mortality (3.1% vs. 5.9%) versus patients undergoing two-stage CR and LR. Compared with patients undergoing two-staged CR and LR, median hospital costs were $13,093 lower for patients undergoing CR + LR (median costs: $36,775 [IQR: 26,416-54,245] vs. $23,682 [IQR: 16,299-32,996]).

CONCLUSION

CR + LR was increasingly performed for treatment of CRLM. Compared with two-staged CR and LR, CR + LR was associated with improved outcomes and lower costs.

[Risk factors of postoperative complications in patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases]

AIM

Univariate and multivariate analysis of various risk factors and morbidity in patients with synchronous colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective data of 173 patients with synchronous CRC liver metastases have been analyzed from January 2013 to February 2017 at the Ryzhikh State Coloproctology Research Center.

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis significant risk factors of morbidity were age ≤61 years, the largest liver metastasis ≥ 2.1 cm (odds ratio (OR) 2.99; 95% CI 1.4-6.5), number of liver metastases >1 (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.1-5.5), bilobar liver injury (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.3-4.8), blood loss (OR 1.001; 95% CI 1.0001-1.002). Model for prediction of complications was constructed (AUC 0.79).

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous surgery is not risk factor of complications. Probability of complications is increased in advanced tumor and consequently more traumatic surgery. Predictive model is useful for prognosis of complications and describes surgical experience of State Coloproctology Research Center.

Laparoscopic combined resection of liver metastases and colorectal cancer: a multicenter, case-matched study using propensity scores

Background

Combined laparoscopic resection of liver metastases and colorectal cancer (LLCR) may hold benefits for selected patients but could increase complication rates. Previous studies have compared LLCR with liver resection alone. Propensity score-matched studies comparing LLCR with laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection (LCR) alone have not been performed.

Methods

A multicenter, case-matched study was performed comparing LLCR (2009–2016, 4 centers) with LCR alone (2009–2016, 2 centers). Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio. Propensity scores were calculated with the following preoperative variables: age, sex, ASA grade, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, type of colorectal resection and T and N stage of the primary tumor. Outcomes were compared using paired tests.

Results

Out of 1020 LCR and 64 LLCR procedures, 122 (2 × 61) patients could be matched. All 61 laparoscopic liver resections were minor hepatectomies, mostly because of a solitary liver metastasis (n = 44, 69%) of small size (≤ 3 cm) (n = 50, 78%). LLCR was associated with a modest increase in operative time [206 (166–308) vs. 197 (148–231) min, p = 0.057] and blood loss [200 (100–700) vs. 75 (5–200) ml, p = 0.011]. The rate of Clavien–Dindo grade 3 or higher complications [9 (15%) vs. 13 (21%), p = 0.418], anastomotic leakage [5 (8%) vs. 4 (7%), p = 1.0], conversion rate [3 (5%) vs. 5 (8%), p = 0.687] and 30-day mortality [0 vs. 1 (2%), p = 1.0] did not differ between LLCR and LCR.

Conclusion

In selected patients requiring minor hepatectomy, LLCR can be safely performed without increasing the risk of postoperative morbidity compared to LCR alone.

Radioembolization treatment for liver metastases

The liver is an organ that, due to vascularisation and functions, is prone to metastases. Most liver metastases are observed in cases of gastrointestinal cancers in: stomach, colon, gallbladder, and bile ducts. Metastatic lesions are also observed in lung, breast, thyroid, kidney, and pancreatic cancer. One of the best known and most effective ways of liver lesion treatment is Metastasectomy. Unfortunately, lesions are frequently inoperable. Apart from chemotherapy, it is possible to apply local treatment such as TACE (trans-arterial chemoembolisation), RFA (Radio Frequency Ablation), and SBRT (Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy). One of the newest methods of inoperable lesion treatment is radioembolisation (SIRT). Intravascular administration of microspheres containing radioisotope 90Y allows delivery of a higher dose of radiation directly to the tumour than traditional radiation with an external beam, while maintaining a small dose to healthy liver methods. Conducted clinical studies confirm the efficacy and safety of SIRT. It is an interesting alternative to other ways of treatment.

Simultaneous versus delayed hepatectomy for synchronous colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare outcomes between patients undergoing simultaneous or delayed hepatectomy for synchronous colorectal liver metastases.

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy for treating liver disease among patients with resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) is unclear. Simultaneous resection of primary tumour and liver metastases may improve patient experience by reducing the number of interventions. However, there are concerns of increased morbidity compared to delayed resections.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library and Google scholar databases. Meta-analyses were performed using both random-effects and fixed-effect models. Publication and patient selection bias were assessed with funnel plots and sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty studies including 5300 patients were identified. There were no statistically significant differences in parameters relating to safety and efficacy between the simultaneous and delayed hepatectomy cohorts. Patients undergoing delayed surgery were more likely to have bilobar disease or undergo major hepatectomy. The average length of hospital stay was six days shorter with simultaneous approach [MD = -6.27 (95% CI: -8.20, -4.34), p < 0.001]. Long term survival was similar for the two approaches [HR = 0.97 (95%CI: 0.88, 1.08), p = 0.601].

CONCLUSION

In selected patients, simultaneous resection of liver metastases with colorectal resection is associated with shorter hospital stay compared to delayed resections, without adversely affecting perioperative morbidity or long-term survival.

Laparoscopic versus open 1-stage resection of synchronous liver metastases and primary colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of open and laparoscopic approaches for concomitant resection of synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2015, all patients undergoing combined resection of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases were included in the study (n=43). Laparoscopic and open groups were compared regarding clinical, perioperative and oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 29 patients in the open group and 14 patients in the laparoscopic group. The groups were similar regarding demographics, comorbidities, histopathological characteristics of the primary tumor and liver metastases. Postoperative complication rate (44.8% vs. 7.1%, P=0.016) was higher, and hospital stay (10 vs. 6.4 days, P=0.001) longer in the open compared to the laparoscopic group. Overall survival (OS) was comparable between the groups (P=0.10); whereas, disease-free survival (DFS) was longer in laparoscopic group (P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results, in patients, whose primary colorectal cancer and metastatic liver disease was amenable to a minimally invasive resection, a concomitant laparoscopic approach resulted in less morbidity without compromising oncologic outcomes. This suggests that a laparoscopic approach may be considered in appropriate patients by surgeons with experience in both advanced laparoscopic liver and colorectal techniques.

Simultaneous Resection for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastasis: the New Standard of Care?

BACKGROUND

Optimal surgical management for patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastasis is controversial. We provide an analysis of surgical utilization and outcomes for patients presenting with synchronous colon and rectal cancer liver metastasis between simultaneous and staged approaches.

METHODS

SPARCS database was used to follow patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer with liver metastases from 2005 to 2014. Using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes, we identified patients undergoing staged and simultaneous resection. Our primary endpoint was major events at 30-day follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 1430 underwent surgery for synchronous colorectal primary and liver metastases between 2005 and 2014. There was no difference in adjusted rates of major events or anastomotic leak. Patients undergoing simultaneous resection were significantly less likely to experience prolonged length of stay (OR = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.21-0.37) or high hospital charges (OR = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.17-0.32) compared to staged resection even among patients undergoing total hepatic lobectomy and complex colorectal resection.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resection was found to be equally as safe as staged resection even when evaluating patients undergoing more complex operations, and led to lower health care utilization. Under appropriate clinical circumstances, simultaneous resection offers benefits to patients and the health care system and should be the recommended surgical approach.

Simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous liver metastases (LM) is gaining interest. We describe management and outcomes of patients undergoing simultaneous resection in the general population.

METHODS

All patients with CRC who underwent surgical resection of LM between 2002 and 2009 were identified using the population-based Ontario Cancer Registry and linked electronic treatment records. Synchronous disease was defined as having resection of CRCLM within 12 weeks of surgery for the primary tumour.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1310 patients underwent resection of CRCLM. Of these, 226 (17%) patients had synchronous disease; 100 (44%) had a simultaneous resection and 126 (56%) had a staged resection. For the simultaneous and the staged groups, the mean number of liver lesions resected was 1.6 and 2.3, respectively (p < 0.001); the mean size of the largest lesion was 3.1 and 4.8 cm, respectively (p < 0.001); and the major hepatic resection rate was 21% and 79%, respectively (p < 0.001). Postoperative mortality for simultaneous cases at 90 days was less than 5%. Five-year overall survival and cancer-specific survival for patients with simultaneous resection was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI] 26%-45%) and 37% (95% CI 25%-50%), respectively. Simultaneous resections are common in the general population. A more conservative approach is being adopted for simultaneous resections by limiting the extent of liver resection. Postoperative mortality and long-term survival in this patient population is similar to that reported in other contemporary series.

CONCLUSION

Compared with a staged approach, patients undergoing simultaneous resections had fewer and smaller liver metastases and underwent less aggressive resections. One-third of these patients achieved long-term survival.

I BRAZILIAN CONSENSUS ON MULTIMODAL TREATMENT OF COLORECTAL LIVER METASTASES. MODULE 2: APPROACH TO RESECTABLE METASTASES

Background:

Liver metastases of colorectal cancer are frequent and potentially fatal event in the evolution of patients.

Aim:

In the second module of this consensus, management of resectable liver metastases was discussed.

Method:

Concept of synchronous and metachronous metastases was determined, and both scenarius were discussed separately according its prognostic and therapeutic peculiarities.

Results:

Special attention was given to the missing metastases due to systemic preoperative treatment response, with emphasis in strategies to avoid its reccurrence and how to manage disappeared lesions.

Conclusion:

Were presented validated ressectional strategies, to be taken into account in clinical practice.

Clinical practice guidelines for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer: a consensus statement of the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncologists (HeSMO)

There is discrepancy and failure to adhere to current international guidelines for the management of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) in hospitals in Greece and Cyprus. The aim of the present document is to provide a consensus on the multidisciplinary management of metastastic CRC, considering both special characteristics of our Healthcare System and international guidelines. Following discussion and online communication among the members of an executive team chosen by the Hellenic Society of Medical Oncology (HeSMO), a consensus for metastastic CRC disease was developed. Statements were subjected to the Delphi methodology on two voting rounds by invited multidisciplinary international experts on CRC. Statements reaching level of agreement by ≥80% were considered as having achieved large consensus, whereas statements reaching 60-80% moderate consensus. One hundred and nine statements were developed. Ninety experts voted for those statements. The median rate of abstain per statement was 18.5% (range: 0-54%). In the end of the process, all statements achieved a large consensus. The importance of centralization, care by a multidisciplinary team, adherence to guidelines, and personalization is emphasized. R0 resection is the only intervention that may offer substantial improvement in the oncological outcomes.

Outcomes of Simultaneous Major Liver Resection and Colorectal Surgery for Colorectal Liver Metastases

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical strategy for treating colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) in patients requiring major liver resection (MLR) is controversial, especially in rectal cancer patients.

METHOD

Between March 2004 and January 2015, 103 patients underwent MLR for CRLM and underwent MLR simultaneously with colorectal surgery (simultaneous group; n = 55) or MLR after colorectal surgery (liver-only group; n = 48).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in sex, age, ASA score, BMI, size and number of liver metastases, liver resection margin, surgical outcomes, and estimated blood loss. The rates of postoperative complications (simultaneous group vs. liver-only group; 76.4 % vs. 62.5 %; P = 0.126) and major complications (29.0 % vs. 25.0 %; P = 0.513) were also similar in both groups. The time to starting a soft diet was longer in the simultaneous group (6.0 days vs. 3.4 days; P < 0.001), but the length of hospital stay was similar (14.9 days vs. 13.3 days; P = 0.345). There were no perioperative deaths, anastomotic leakage, or septic complications. Among patients who underwent rectal surgery, the frequency of complications was greater in the simultaneous group (87.0 % vs. 56.2 %; P = 0.031), but there was no difference in major complications (34.7 % vs. 25.0 %; P = 0.822). The postoperative morbidity index was 0.204 and 0.180 in the simultaneous and liver-only groups, respectively, in all patients, and was 0.227 and 0.136, respectively, in the rectal surgery subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous MLR is feasible and safe in synchronous CRLM patients, including rectal cancer patients.

'Liver-first' approach for metastatic colorectal cancer

The liver-first approach was proposed for the first time in 2006 to obtain resectability of stage IV colorectal cancer patients and complete the therapeutic plan. From then some groups have used this new revolutionary approach reporting promising results. Other alternative strategies have been proposed for metastatic patients. The authors reviewed the literature weighing the pros and cons of each strategy proposed to manage these advanced tumor stages. The therapeutic options are analyzed in the light of oncologic problems and evidence. Also problems, questions and perspectives are given. Even if the 'liver-first' approach seems to be a promising strategy, the ideal diagnostic-therapeutic flowchart for metastatic colorectal cancer is still difficult to standardize. The great heterogeneity of this population of patients is one of the main problems. A 'tailored approach' philosophy is necessary to calibrate, in a multidisciplinary setting, a case-by-case choice of therapeutic options.

Simultaneous hepatic resection benefits patients with synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases

Objective

The safety of the simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastases (SCRLM) is still being debated. However, this simultaneous operative approach is more commonly adopted at present than in the past. Therefore, we compared simultaneous hepatic resection with delayed hepatic resection in this study.

Methods

All patients with SCRLM diagnosed before initial treatment between January 2009 and September 2013 were retrospectively included in our study. Short-term and long-term outcomes were compared in patients who underwent simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resection and those treated by delayed hepatectomy.

Results

Among the 73 patients diagnosed with SCRLM, simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resection was performed in 60 patients (82.2%), while delayed hepatic resection was performed in 13 patients (17.8%). The mortality rate was zero. The postoperative complication rate after delayed resection was higher than, but not significantly different from, that after simultaneous resection (46% vs. 23%, P=0.166). The duration of operating time (240 vs. 420 min, P<0.05) and postoperative hospital stay time (11 vs. 18 days, P<0.05) were shorter in the simultaneous resection group. After the initial treatments were given, the 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates in the simultaneous resection group were 77%, 59%, and 53%, respectively, whereas those in the delayed resection group were 67%, 42%, and 10%, respectively. The 5-year survival rate in the simultaneous resection group was 23%; overall survival differed significantly between the two groups (P=0.037). Median disease-free survival (DFS) times were 19.1 months in the simultaneous resection group and 8.8 months in the delayed resection group. DFS differed significantly between the two groups.

Conclusions

Simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resection is safe and exhibits advantages in the long-time survival of patients.

Synchronous Resectable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Lymph Node Involvement Predicts Poor Outcome

To evaluate the value of lymph node status of primary tumors in predicting the prognosis of synchronous resectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).The characteristics of resectable mCRC are substantially different from other cancers, and the prognostic factors of resectable mCRC are still controversial.The data of 2007 patients with mCRC who received resection of the primary tumors and metastatic lesions synchronously were reviewed from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End-Result database. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate the capacity of different prognostic factors. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between the lymph node status and other factors. The mRNA profiles of primary resectable mCRC tumors were obtained by microarray at our center.The median survival times were 50, 36, 32, 27, and 19 months in the N0-stage, N1a-stage, N1b-stage, N2a-stage, and N2b-stage subgroups according to the 7th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Tumor Lymph Node Metastasis (TNM) N-classification (P = 0.000), and 40, 29, 22, and 15 months in patients with metastatic lymph node ratio (LNR) <0.25, 0.25-0.49, 0.5-0.74, and ≥0.75 subgroups (P = 0.000). In the COX model, the 7th AJCC TNM N-stage and LNR were independent prognostic factors. The mRNA profile was not associated with lymph node involvement.Both the N-stage according to the 7th AJCC TNM staging system and LNR had the capacity to subclassify synchronous resectable mCRC with different prognoses. The lymph node might be integrated into the AJCC staging system as a diagnose-delay prognostic factor for stage IV disease.

Unresolved issues and controversies surrounding the management of colorectal cancer liver metastasis

Ideally, tumors that might cause morbidity and mortality should be treated, preferably early, with proven, convincing, and effective therapy to prevent tumor progression or recurrence, while maintaining a favorable risk-benefit profile for the individual patient. For patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), this diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic precision is currently impossible. Despite significant improvements in diagnostic procedures, a sizable number of patients with CRC have liver metastases either at presentation or will subsequently develop it. And in many parts of the world, most cancer-related deaths are still due to metastases that are resistant to conventional therapy. Metastases to the liver occur in more than 50% of patients with CRC and represent the major determinant of outcome following curative treatment of the primary tumor. Liver resection offers the best chance of cure for metastases confined to the liver. However, due to a paucity of randomized controlled trials, its timing is controversial and a hotly debated topic. This article reviews some of the main controversies surrounding the surgical management of colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM).

Rectal cancer: a review

Rectal cancer is the second most common cancer in large intestine. The prevalence and the number of young patients diagnosed with rectal cancer have made it as one of the major health problems in the world. With regard to the improved access to and use of modern screening tools, a number of new cases are diagnosed each year. Considering the location of the rectum and its adjacent organs, management and treatment of rectal tumor is different from tumors located in other parts of the gastrointestinal tract or even the colon. In this article, we will review the current updates on rectal cancer including epidemiology, risk factors, clinical presentations, screening, and staging. Diagnostic methods and latest treatment modalities and approaches will also be discussed in detail.

Efficacy and safety of simultaneous vs staged operation for synchronous colorectal liver metastases: A meta-analysis

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of simultaneous vs staged operation for synchronous colorectal liver metastases.

METHODS: The relevant studies published between March 2004 and March 2014 were searched, and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate operative time, postoperative complications rate, perioperative mortality, postoperative 1-, 3-, 5-year survival rates and related indicators.

RESULTS: A total of 16 non-randomized controlled studies were included in this analysis. Comparing simultaneous to staged resection, there were no significant differences in operative time (WMD = -49.81, 95%CI: -125.07-25.46, P = 0.19), postoperative complications rate (OR = 1.26, 95%CI: 0.84-1.88, P = 0.26), perioperative mortality (OR = 1.69, 95%CI: 0.82-3.52, P = 0.16), postoperative 1- (OR = 0.69, 95%CI: 0.46-1.04, P = 0.08), 3- (OR = 0.69, 95%CI: 0.46-1.04, P = 0.08) and 5-year survival rates (OR = 1.00, 95%CI: 0.74-1.36, P = 0.98).

CONCLUSION: Simultaneous and staged resections show no significant differences in either safety or efficacy. The patient's general condition, primary tumor, tumor position, and number of liver metastases should be comprehensively assessed to formulate individualized approach.

Timing of hepatectomy for resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases: for whom simultaneous resection is more suitable--a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases is still controversial. Retrospective cohort studies always had baseline imbalances in comparing simultaneous resection with staged strategy. Significantly more patients with mild conditions received simultaneous resections. Previous published meta-analyses based on these studies did not correct these biases, resulting in low reliability. Our meta-analysis was conducted to compensate for this deficiency and find candidates for each surgical strategy.

METHODS

A systemic search for major databases and relevant journals from January 2000 to April 2013 was performed. The primary outcomes were postoperative mortality, morbidity, overall survival and disease-free survival. Other outcomes such as number of patients need blood transfusion and length of hospital stay were also assessed. Baseline analyses were conducted to find and correct potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

22 studies with a total of 4494 patients were finally included. After correction of baseline imbalance, simultaneous and staged resections were similar in postoperative mortality (RR = 1.14, P = 0.52), morbidity (RR = 1.02, P = 0.85), overall survival (HR = 0.96, P = 0.50) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.97, P = 0.87). Only in pulmonary complications, simultaneous resection took a significant advantage (RR = 0.23, P = 0.003). The number of liver metastases was the major factor interfering with selecting surgical strategies. With >3 metastases, simultaneous and staged strategies were almost the same in morbidity (49.4% vs. 50.9%). With ≤3 metastases, staged resection caused lower morbidity (13.8% vs. 17.2%), not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of liver metastases was the major confounding factor for postoperative morbidity, especially in staged resections. Without baseline imbalances, simultaneous took no statistical significant advantage in safety and efficacy. Considering the inherent limitations of this meta-analysis, the results should be interpret and applied prudently.

Strategies for Management of Synchronous Colorectal Metastases

The management of synchronous presentation of colorectal cancer and liver metastases has long been a topic of debate and discussion for surgeons due to the unique dilemma of balancing operative timing along with treatment strategy. Operative strategies for resection include staged resection with colon first approach, "reverse" staged resection with liver metastases resected first, and one-stage, or simultaneous, resection of both the primary tumor and liver metastases approach. These operative strategies can be further augmented with perioperative chemotherapy and other novel approaches that may improve resectability and patient survival. The decision on operative timing and approach, however, remains largely dependent on the surgeon's determination of disease resectability, patient fitness, and the need for neoadjuvant chemotherapy.