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

Simultaneous resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: current state-of-the-art

BACKGROUND

A large proportion of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) presents with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM) at diagnosis. Surgical approaches for patients with sCRLM have evolved over the past decades. Simultaneous resection (SR) of CRC and sCRLM for selected patients has emerged as a safe and efficient alternative approach to traditional staged resections.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed and Web of Science databases with the end of search date October 30, 2023. The MeSH terms "simultaneous resections" and "combined resections" in combination with "colorectal liver metastases," "colorectal cancer," "liver resection," and "hepatectomy" were searched in the title and/or abstract.

RESULTS

SRs aim to achieve maximal tumor clearance, minimizing the risk of disease progression and optimizing the potential for long-term survival. Improvements in perioperative care, advances in surgical techniques, and a better understanding of patient selection criteria have collectively contributed to reducing morbidity and mortality associated with these complex procedures. Several studies have demonstrated that SR are associated with reduced overall length of stay and lower costs with comparable morbidity and long-term outcomes. In light of these outcomes, the proportion of patients undergoing SR for CRC and sCRLM has increased substantially over the past 2 decades.

CONCLUSION

For patients with sCRLM, SR represents an attractive alternative to the traditional staged approach and should be selectively used; however, the decision on whether to proceed with a simultaneous versus staged approach should be individualized based on several patient- and disease-related factors.

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.

Impact of cumulative operative time on postoperative complication risk in simultaneous resections of colorectal liver metastases and primary tumors

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and primary colorectal cancers (CRC) is nuanced without firm rules for selection. This study aimed to identify factors associated with morbidity after simultaneous resection.

METHODS

Using a prospective database, patients undergoing simultaneous CLM-CRC resection from 1/1/2017-7/1/2020 were analyzed. Regression modeling estimated impact of colorectal resection type, Kawaguchi-Gayet (KG) hepatectomy complexity, and perioperative factors on 90-day complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 120 patients underwent simultaneous CLM-CRC resection. Grade≥2 complications occurred in 38.3% (n = 46); these patients experienced longer length of stay (median LOS 7.5 vs. 4, p < 0.001) and increased readmission (39% vs. 1.4%, p < 0.001) compared to patients with zero or Grade 1 complications. Median OR time was 298 min. Patients within highest operative time quartile (>506 min) had higher grade≥2 complications (57%vs. 23%, p = 0.04) and greater than 4-fold increased odds of grade≥2 morbidity (OR 4.3, 95% CI (Confidence Interval) 1.41-13.1, p = 0.01). After adjusting for Pringle time, KG complexity and colorectal resection type, increasing operative time was associated with grade≥2 complications, especially for resections in highest quartile of operative time (OR 7.28, 95% CI 1.73-30.6, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing simultaneous CLM-CRC resection, prolonged operative time is independently associated with grade≥2 complications. Awareness of cumulative operative time may inform intraoperative decision-making by surgical teams.

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 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.

Risk scoring system for recurrence after simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer liver metastasis

Background

The simultaneous resection of synchronous colorectal cancer liver metastasis (SCRLM) has been widely applied. It is necessary to establish a risk scoring system to predict post-operative recurrence, especially in patients with neoadjuvant treatment.

Methods

The medical records of 221 patients undergoing simultaneous resection of CRLM were assessed in this study with a further 128 patients allocated to a validation group. All patients in the study group were classified according to their history of neoadjuvant treatment and univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to study independent risk factors. A score model was then generated according to the factors included. Our data set were also applied to validate three other existing scoring models [Fong clinical recurrence score (CRS), Konopke, and Zakaria disease-free survival (DFS) score], and the concordance index was calculated for comparison among these models.

Results

CRLM involving more than three nodes positive for a primary tumor was considered an independent risk factor for progression in patients without neoadjuvant treatment and all score models could discretely stratify patients according to disease free survival. In patients receiving neoadjuvant treatment, CRLM involving more than one node and transfusion invasion were major determinants in patients after treatment. However, only our scoring system and Fong’s CRS score could discretely discriminate patients. In the validation group, patients were significantly classified with the score system.

Conclusions

Existing score models had better values for determining prognosis in patients with SCRLM, especially in those undertaking neoadjuvant treatment. Larger cohorts, along with more detailed clinical features and multicenter validation should be undertaken before utilization.

Open and/or laparoscopic one-stage resections of primary colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: An observational study

One-stage resections of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases have been reported to be feasible and safe. Minimally invasive approaches have become more common for both colorectal and hepatic surgeries. This study aimed to investigate outcomes of these combined surgical procedures among different approaches.We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed as having primary colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases and who underwent 1-stage primary resection and hepatectomy with curative intent in our hospital. According to the surgical approach for the primary tumor and hepatic lesions, namely open laparotomy (Op) or laparoscopic approach (Lap), patients were classified into Op-Op, Lap-Op (laparoscopic colorectal resection plus open hepatectomy), and Lap-Lap groups, respectively. Clinicopathological factors were reviewed, and short- and long-term outcomes were compared among the groups.The Op-Op, Lap-Op, and Lap-Lap groups comprised 36, 18, and 17 patients, respectively. The superior/posterior hepatic segments were more frequently resected via an open approach. There was no laparoscopic major hepatectomy. The median volume of intraoperative blood loss was smaller in the Lap-Lap and Lap-Op groups (290 and 270 mL) than in the Op-Op group (575 mL, P = .008). The hospital stay after surgery was shorter in the Lap-Lap and Lap-Op groups (median: 17 days and 15 days, vs 19 days for the Op-Op group, P = .033). The postoperative complication rates and survivals were similar among the groups.Application of laparoscopy to 1-stage resections of primary colorectal cancer and liver metastases may offer advantages of enhanced recovery from surgical treatment, given appropriate patient selection.

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.

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.

Safety evaluation of simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastasis after neoadjuvant therapy: A propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Considering the surgical safety and perioperative complications, simultaneous resection after neoadjuvant therapy is not commonly recommended.

METHODS

A total of 253 patients were included in study. Comparison of the short-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment in Group A (n = 96) and Group B (neoadjuvant therapy, n = 96).

RESULTS

There was no postoperative mortality. After matching, the differences from surgical confounders were well-balanced. Morbidity (15.6% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.981), and Clavien-Dindo grade of complications (p = 0.710) were similar. No difference was found when the complications were divided according to the origin (general, colorectal and hepatic). Length of the hospital stays also did not differ between the groups (p = 0.482). More importantly, there was no increase in the number of patients with delayed adjuvant treatment after surgery in Group B.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant treatment did not increase morbidity, length of hospital stays and influence adjuvant treatment after simultaneous resection.

[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.

Oncosurgical Management of Liver Limited Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: Preliminary Data and Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Colorectal cancer is the fourth commonest cancer and second commonest cause of cancer-related death in the United Kingdom. Almost 15% of patients have metastases on presentation. An increasing number of surgical strategies and better neoadjuvant treatment options are responsible for more patients undergoing resection of liver metastases, with prolonged survival in a select group of patients who present with synchronous disease. It is clear that the optimal strategy for the management of these patients remains unclear, and there is certainly a complete absence of Level 1 evidence in the literature.

Objective

The objective of this study is to undertake preliminary work and devise an outline trial protocol to inform the future development of clinical studies to investigate the management of patients with liver limited stage IV colorectal cancer.

Methods

We have undertaken some preliminary work and begun the process of designing a randomized controlled trial and present a draft trial protocol here.

Results

This study is at the protocol development stage only, and as such no results are available. There is no funding in place for this study, and no anticipated start date.

Conclusions

We have presented preliminary work and an outline trial protocol which we anticipate will inform the future development of clinical studies to investigate the management of patients with liver limited stage IV colorectal cancer. We do not believe that the trial we have designed will answer the most significant clinical questions, nor that it is feasible to be delivered within the United Kingdom’s National Health Service at this current time.

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.

Resection of the Primary Tumor in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer: When Is It Necessary?

Management of metastatic colorectal cancer requires accurate staging and multidisciplinary evaluation, leading to a consensus treatment plan with the ultimate goal of increasing survival and improving the quality of life, while taking into consideration the patient's performance status, disease burden, and goals of care. Since the introduction of multidrug chemotherapeutic regimens, survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer has improved. Many patients with unresectable disease are undergoing surgery for asymptomatic primary tumors despite evidence that it is usually a futile intervention. Palliative measures for local control of the primary tumor include colonic stents, laser therapy, and fulguration.

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.

Long-term oncologic outcomes for simultaneous resection of synchronous metastatic liver and primary colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Twenty-five percent of patients with colorectal cancer present with simultaneous liver metastasis. Complete resection is the only potential curative treatment. Due to improvements in operative and perioperative management, simultaneous liver and colon resections are an accepted procedure at specialized centers for selected patients. Nevertheless, little is known about the long-term, oncologic results of simultaneous operative procedures compared with those of staged operations.

METHODS

Patients with colorectal cancer and simultaneous liver metastases presenting for complete resection at a tertiary cancer center were identified. Patients who received the primary colon resection at an outside institution were excluded from analysis.

RESULTS

Between 1984 and 2008, 429 patients underwent operative treatment for colorectal cancer with simultaneous liver metastasis. Of these, 320 (75%) had simultaneous resection and 109 had staged resection. There was no difference in the distribution of primary tumor locations between the 2 groups. Mean size of the hepatic metastases was significantly greater in the staged group (median 4 cm vs 2.5 cm; P < .01). Neither disease-free nor overall survival differed significantly between the 2 treatment strategies. The extent of the liver procedure (more than 3 segments) was identified as a risk factor for decreased disease-free and overall survival (both P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous liver and colorectal resections for metastatic colorectal cancer are associated with similar long-term cancer outcome compared with staged procedures.

Conversion therapy for unresectable gastric cancer

Unresectable gastric cancer cases are often diagnosed at a far advanced stage, which are hard to resect radically and suffer a poor prognosis. Therefore, palliative chemotherapy is recommended as the main treatment by the current clinical guidelines for gastric cancer. Fortunately, in recent years some clinical studies revealed that after treatment with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, interventional therapy, hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and so on, and multidisciplinary assessment, many unresectable gastric cancer cases could be converted into resectable cases, which consequently prolongs their survival time and improves their quality of life significantly. In the present review, we summarize the status and progress of treatment for unresectable gastric cancer, as well as the strategy and case selection for conversion therapy.

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.

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes for matched patients undergoing combined resections.

METHODS

An international multicenter database of 142 patients that underwent combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM between 1997 and 2013 was compared to a database of 241 patients treated by open during the same period. Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment.

RESULTS

After matching, 89 patients were compared in each group including mostly ASA I-II patients, presenting with mean number of 1.5 CRLM, with a mean diameter of 30 mm, and resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy. A rectal resection was required in 46 and 43 % of laparoscopic and open procedures, respectively (p = 0.65). There was no difference in global operative time, blood loss and transfusion rates between the two groups. A conversion was required in 7 % of the laparoscopic procedures. Morbidity rates were similar in the two groups (p = 1.0). The 3-year overall survival in the laparoscopy and open groups were 78 and 65 %, respectively (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without severe comorbidities presenting with one, small (≤3 cm), CRLM resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy, combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM allowed similar short- and long-term outcomes compared with the open approach.

Laparoscopic simultaneous resection of colorectal primary tumor and liver metastases: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Preliminary series have shown the feasibility of combined laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes for matched patients undergoing combined resections.

METHODS

An international multicenter database of 142 patients that underwent combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM between 1997 and 2013 was compared to a database of 241 patients treated by open during the same period. Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes was performed after propensity score adjustment.

RESULTS

After matching, 89 patients were compared in each group including mostly ASA I-II patients, presenting with mean number of 1.5 CRLM, with a mean diameter of 30 mm, and resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy. A rectal resection was required in 46 and 43 % of laparoscopic and open procedures, respectively (p = 0.65). There was no difference in global operative time, blood loss and transfusion rates between the two groups. A conversion was required in 7 % of the laparoscopic procedures. Morbidity rates were similar in the two groups (p = 1.0). The 3-year overall survival in the laparoscopy and open groups were 78 and 65 %, respectively (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without severe comorbidities presenting with one, small (≤3 cm), CRLM resectable by a wedge resection or a left lateral sectionectomy, combined laparoscopic resection of CRC and SCRLM allowed similar short- and long-term outcomes compared with the open approach.

Formalin irrigation for hemorrhagic chronic radiation proctitis

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of a modified topical formalin irrigation method in refractory hemorrhagic chronic radiation proctitis (CRP).

METHODS: Patients with CRP who did not respond to previous medical treatments and presented with grade II-III rectal bleeding according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events were enrolled. Patients with anorectal strictures, deep ulcerations, and fistulas were excluded. All patients underwent flexible endoscopic evaluation before treatment. Patient demographics and clinical data, including primary tumor, radiotherapy and previous treatment options, were collected. Patients received topical 4% formalin irrigation in a clasp-knife position under spinal epidural anesthesia in the operating room. Remission of rectal bleeding and related complications were recorded. Defecation, remission of bleeding, and other symptoms were investigated at follow-up. Endoscopic findings in patients with rectovaginal fistulas were analyzed.

RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (19 female, 5 male) with a mean age of 61.5 ± 9.5 years were enrolled. The mean time from the end of radiotherapy to the onset of bleeding was 11.1 ± 9.0 mo (range: 2-24 mo). Six patients (25.0%) were blood transfusion dependent. The median preoperative Vienna Rectoscopy Score (VRS) was 3 points. Nineteen patients (79.2%) received only one course of topical formalin irrigation, and five (20.8%) required a second course. No side effects were observed. One month after treatment, bleeding cessation was complete in five patients and obvious in 14; the effectiveness rate was 79.1% (19/24). For long-term efficacy, 5/16, 1/9 and 0/6 patients complained of persistent bleeding at 1, 2 and 5 years after treatment, respectively. Three rectovaginal fistulas were found at 1 mo, 3 mo and 2 years after treatment. Univariate analysis showed associations of higher endoscopic VRS and ulceration score with risk of developing rectovaginal fistula.

CONCLUSION: Modified formalin irrigation is an effective and safe method for hemorrhagic CRP, but should be performed cautiously in patients with a high endoscopic VRS.

Simultaneous resection for rectal cancer with synchronous liver metastasis is a safe procedure

BACKGROUND

One quarter of colorectal cancer patients will present with liver metastasis at the time of diagnosis. Recent studies have shown that simultaneous resections are safe and feasible for stage IV colon cancer. Limited data are available for simultaneous surgery in stage IV rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-eight patients underwent surgical treatment for stage IV rectal cancer. In 145 (73%) patients, a simultaneous procedure was performed. Fifty-three (27%) patients underwent staged liver resection. A subpopulation of 69 (35%) patients underwent major liver resection (3 segments or more) and 30 (44%) patients with simultaneous surgery.

RESULTS

The demographics of the 2 groups were similar. Complication rates were comparable for simultaneous or staged resections, even in the group subjected to major liver resection. Total hospital stay was significantly shorter for the simultaneously resected patients (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous resection of rectal primaries and liver metastases is a safe procedure in carefully selected patients at high-volume institutions, even if major liver resections are required.

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.

Systematic review of surgical management of synchronous colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases has not yet been elucidated. The aim of the present study was systematically to review current evidence concerning the timing and sequence of surgical interventions: colon first, liver first or simultaneous.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed of clinical studies comparing the timing and sequence of surgical interventions in patients with synchronous liver metastases. Retrospective studies were included but case reports and small case series were excluded. Preoperative and intraoperative data, length of hospital stay, perioperative mortality and morbidity, and 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were compared. The studies were evaluated according to a modification of the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) criteria.

RESULTS

Eighteen papers were included and 21 entries analysed. Five entries favoured the simultaneous approach regarding duration of procedure, whereas three showed no difference; five entries favoured simultaneous treatment in terms of blood loss, whereas in four there was no difference; and all studies comparing length of hospital stay favoured the simultaneous approach. Five studies favoured the simultaneous approach in terms of morbidity and eight found no difference, and no study demonstrated a difference in perioperative mortality. One study suggested a better 5-year survival rate after staged procedures, and another suggested worse 1-year but better 3- and 5-year survival rates following the simultaneous approach. The median MINORS score was 10, with incomplete follow-up and outcome reporting accounting primarily for low scores.

CONCLUSION

None of the three surgical strategies for synchronous colorectal liver metastases appeared inferior to the others.

Simultaneous colorectal and hepatic procedures for colorectal cancer result in increased morbidity but equivalent mortality compared with colorectal or hepatic procedures alone: outcomes from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous colorectal and hepatic surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing as surgery becomes safer and less invasive. There is controversy regarding the morbidity associated with simultaneous, compared with separate or staged, resections.

METHODS

Data for 2005-2008 from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) were used to compare morbidity after 19,925 colorectal procedures for CRC (CR group), 2295 hepatic resections for metastatic CRC (HEP group), and 314 simultaneous colorectal and hepatic resections (SIM group).

RESULTS

An increasing number of simultaneous resections were performed per year. Fewer major colorectal and liver resections were performed in the SIM than in the CR and HEP groups. Patients in the SIM group had a longer operative time and postoperative length of stay compared with those in either the CR or HEP groups. Simultaneous procedures resulted in higher rates of postoperative morbidity and major morbidity than CR procedures, but not HEP procedures. This difference was driven by higher rates of wound and organ space infections, and a greater incidence of septic shock. Mortality rates did not differ among the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals in the NSQIP are performing more simultaneous colonic and hepatic resections for CRC. These procedures are associated with increases in operative time, length of stay and rate of perioperative complications. Simultaneous procedures do not, however, increase perioperative mortality.

Timing of hepatectomy in resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM): Simultaneous or delayed?

The optimal surgical strategy for treatment of patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLRM) remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all observational studies to define the safety and efficacy of simultaneous versus delayed resection of the colon and liver. A search for all major databases and relevant journals from inception to April 2012 without restriction on languages or regions was performed. Outcome measures were the primary parameters of postoperative survival, complication, and mortality, as well as other parameters of blood loss, operative time, and length of hospitalization. The test of heterogeneity was performed with the Q statistic. A total of 2,880 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Long-term oncological pooled estimates of overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81-1.14; P = 0.64; I(2) = 0) and recurrence-free survival (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.76-1.43; P = 0.79; I(2) = 53%) all showed similar outcomes for both simultaneous and delayed resections. A lower incidence of postoperative complication was attributed to the simultaneous group as opposed to that in the delayed group (modified relative ratio [RR] = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.67-0.89; P = 0.0002; I(2) = 10%), whereas in terms of mortality within the postoperative 60 days no statistical difference was detected (RR = 1.12; 95% CI: 0.61-2.08; P = 0.71; I(2) = 32%). Finally, selection criteria were recommended for SCRLM patients suitable for a simultaneous resection.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous resection is as efficient as a delayed procedure for long-term survival. There is evidence that in SCRLM patients simultaneous resection is an acceptable and safe option with carefully selected conditions. Due to the inherent limitations of the present study, future randomized controlled trials will be useful to confirm this conclusion. (HEPATOLOGY 2013;57:2346-2357).

Meta-analysis of simultaneous versus staged resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases

AIM

  There is no clear consensus on the optimal timing of surgical resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM). This study is a meta-analysis of the available evidence.

METHODS

  Systematic review and meta-analysis of trials comparing outcomes following simultaneous resection with staged resection for SCLM published from 1990 to 2010 in PubMed, Embase, Ovid and Medline. Pooled odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using either the fixed effects or random effects model.

RESULTS

  Nineteen non-randomized controlled trials (NRCT) studies were included in this analysis. These studies included a total of 2724 patients: 1116 underwent simultaneous resection and 1608 underwent staged resection. Meta-analysis showed that shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001) and lower total complication rate (P < 0.001) were observed in patients undergoing simultaneous resection group. The overall survival rate in the simultaneous resection group did not statistically differ with that in the staged resection group at 1 year (P = 0.13), 3 years (P = 0.26), 5 years (P = 0.38), as well as the 1, 3 and 5 years disease-free survival rates (respectively, P = 0.55; P = 0.16; P = 0.12). No significant difference was noted between the two groups in terms of mortality (P = 0.16), intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.06) and recurrence (P = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

  Simultaneous resection is safe and efficient in the treatment of patients with SCLM while avoiding a second laparotomy. In selected patients, simultaneous resection might be considered as the preferred approach. However, the findings have to be carefully interpreted due to the lower level of evidence and the existence of heterogeneity.

A meta-analysis comparing simultaneous versus delayed resections in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases

INTRODUCTION

The traditional surgical management for patients presenting with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) has been a delayed resection. However, in some centres, there has been a shift in favour of 'simultaneous' resections. The aim of this study was to use a meta-analytical model to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) undergoing simultaneous resections versus delayed resections.

METHOD

Comparative studies published between 1991 and 2010 were included. Evaluated endpoints were intra-operative parameters, post-operative parameters, post-operative adverse events and survival. A random-effects meta-analytical model was used and sensitivity analysis performed to account for bias in patient selection.

RESULTS

Twenty-four non-randomized studies were included, reporting on 3159 patients of which 1381 (43.7%) had simultaneous resections and 1778 (56.3%) had delayed resections. The bilobar distribution (P = 0.01), size of liver metastases (P < 0.001) and the proportion of major liver resections (P < 0.001) was found to be higher in the delayed resection group compared to the simultaneous resection group. There was no significant difference in operative blood loss (95% CI, -279.28, 22.53; P = 0.1) or duration of surgery (WMD -23.83, 95% CI, -85.04, 37.38; P = 0.45). Duration of hospital stay was significantly reduced in simultaneous resections by 5.6 days (95% CI: 2.4-8.9 days, P = 0.007) No significant differences in post-operative complications (36% vs 37%, P = 0.27), overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.15, P = 0.96) or disease free survival (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71-1.02, P = 0.08) were found. Sensitivity analysis revealed that these findings were consistent for the duration of hospital stay, post-operative complications, overall survival and disease free survival.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that the selection criteria for patients undergoing simultaneous or delayed resections differs resulting in a discrepancy in the metastatic disease severity being compared between the two groups. The comparable intra-operative parameters, post-operative complications and survival found between the two groups suggest that delayed resections may result in better outcomes. Similarly, the reduced length of hospital stay in simultaneous resections may only be as a result of the reduced disease severity in this group. Simultaneous resections can only be recommended in patients with limited hepatic disease until prospective studies comparing similar disease burdens between the two resection groups are available.

Treatment strategy for colorectal cancer with resectable synchronous liver metastases: Is any evidence-based strategy possible?

Fifteen percent to twenty-five percent of patients affected by colorectal cancer presents with liver metastases at diagnosis. In resectable cases, surgery is the only potentially curative treatment and achieves survival rates up to 50% at 5 years. Management is complex, as colorectal resection, liver resection, chemotherapy, and, in locally advanced mid/low rectal tumors, radiotherapy have to be integrated. Modern medical practice usually relies on evidence-based protocols. Levels of evidence for synchronous metastases are poor: published studies include few recent prospective series and several retrospective analyses collecting a limited number of patients across long periods of time. Data are difficult to be generalized and are mainly representative of single centre's experience, biased by local recruitment, indications and surgical technique. In this context, surgeons have to renounce to "evidence-based medicine" and to adopt a sort of "experience-based medicine". Anyway, some suggestions are possible. Simultaneous colorectal and liver resection can be safely performed whenever minor hepatectomies are planned, while a case-by-case evaluation is mandatory in case of more complex procedures. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is preferentially scheduled for patients with advanced metastatic tumors to assess disease biology and to control lesions. It can be safely performed with primary tumor in situ, even planning simultaneous resection at its end. Locally advanced mid/low rectal tumor represents a further indication to neoadjuvant therapies, even if treatment's schedule is not yet standardized. In summary, several issues have to be solved, but every single HPB centre should define its proper strategy to optimize patient's selection, disease control and safety and completeness of surgery.