Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable colorectal liver metastases: an international multicentre propensity score matched analysis on long-term outcomes according to established prognostic risk scores

HPB ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcello Di Martino ◽  
Florian Primavesi ◽  
Nicholas Syn ◽  
Dimitri Dorcaratto ◽  
Ángela de la Hoz Rodríguez ◽  
...  
HPB ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. e193-e194
Author(s):  
M.C. Marques ◽  
A.L. Diniz ◽  
H.S.C. Ribeiro ◽  
W.L. Costa ◽  
A.L. Godoy ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 4027
Author(s):  
Sebastian Knitter ◽  
Andreas Andreou ◽  
Daniel Kradolfer ◽  
Anika Sophie Beierle ◽  
Sina Pesthy ◽  
...  

Minimal-invasive hepatectomy (MIH) has been increasingly performed for benign and malignant liver lesions with most promising short-term results. However, the oncological role of MIH in the treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) needs further investigation. Clinicopathological data of patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2012 and 2017 at the Department of Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, and the Inselspital Bern were assessed. Postoperative outcomes und long-term survivals of patients following MIH were compared with those after conventional open hepatectomy (OH) after 1:1 propensity score matching. During the study period, 229 and 91 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM at the Charité Berlin and the Inselspital Bern, respectively. Patients who underwent MIH in one of the two centers (n = 69) were compared with a matched cohort of patients who underwent OH. MIH was associated with lower complication rates (23% vs. 44%, p = 0.011), shorter length of intensive care unit stay (ICU, 1 vs. 2 days, p = 0.043), shorter length of hospital stay (7 vs. 11 days, p < 0.0001), and a reduced need for intraoperative transfusions (12% vs. 25%, p = 0.047) compared to OH. R0 status was achieved in 93% and 75% of patients after MIH and OH, respectively (p = 0.005). After a median follow-up of 31 months, MIH resulted in similar five-year overall survival (OS) rate (56% vs. 48%, p = 0.116) in comparison to OH. MIH for CRLM is associated with lower postoperative morbidity, shorter length of ICU and hospital stay, reduced need for transfusions, and comparable oncologic outcomes compared to the established OH. Our findings suggest that MIH should be considered as the preferred method for the treatment of curatively resectable CRLM.


2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 2281-2289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo Robles-Campos ◽  
Roberto Brusadin ◽  
Asunción López-Conesa ◽  
Víctor López-López ◽  
Álvaro Navarro-Barrios ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 84 (12) ◽  
pp. 1913-1923
Author(s):  
Li Long ◽  
Li Wei ◽  
Wu Hong

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the long-term prognosis of patients with colorectal liver metastases undergoing liver resection (LR) with or without radiofrequency ablation (RFA). A systematic search was performed using both medical subject headings and truncated word searches to identify all comparative studies published on this topic. The primary outcomes were postoperative overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. A total of 10 studies which included 3900 patients were finally enrolled in the meta-analysis. Patients treated by LR gained better OS (HR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.82–2.37) and DFS (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.70–2.15) than those patients treated by LR 1 RFA, after pooling unadjusted HRs from the 10 studies. Five studies provided the data of adjusted HR. The pooled results showed that patients in the LR 1 RFA group had shorter OS (HR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.18–2.32, P = 0.004) but similar DFS (HR: 1.36, 95% CI: 0.99–1.88) compared with patients in the LR group. Our meta-analysis showed that colorectal liver metastases patients who underwent LR gained better long-term outcomes compared with patients undergoing LR 1 RFA. However, after adjusting confounders, LR 1 RFA achieved comparable DFS with LR alone.


2017 ◽  
Vol 214 (4) ◽  
pp. 752-756 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichiro Haruki ◽  
Hiroaki Shiba ◽  
Takashi Horiuchi ◽  
Taro Sakamoto ◽  
Takeshi Gocho ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document