Resection of Concomitant Hepatic and Extrahepatic Metastases from Colorectal Cancer - A Worthwhile Operation?

Background: The benefit of hepatic resection in case of concomitant colorectal hepatic and extrahepatic metastases (CHEHMs) is still debatable. The purpose of this study is to assess the results of resection of hepatic and extrahepatic metastases in patients with CHEHMs in a high-volume center for both hepatobiliary and colorectal surgery and to identify prognostic factors that correlate with longer survival in these patients. METHOD: It was performed a retrospective analysis of 678 consecutive patients with liver resection for colorectal cancer metastases operated in a single Centre between April 1996 and March 2016. Among these, 73 patients presented CHEHMs. Univariate analysis was performed to identify the risk factors for overall survival (OS) in these patients. Results: There were 20 CHMs located at the lymphatic node level, 20 at the peritoneal level, 12 at the ovary and lung level, 12 presenting as local relapses and 9 other sites. 53 curative resections (R0) were performed. The difference in overall survival between the CHEHMs group and the CHMs group is statistically significant for the entire groups (p 0.0001), as well as in patients who underwent R0 resection (p 0.0001). In CHEHMs group, the OS was statistically significant higher in patients who underwent R0 resection vs. those with R1/R2 resection (p=0.004). Three variables were identified as prognostic factors for poor OS following univariate analysis: 4 or more hepatic metastases, major hepatectomy and the performance of operation during first period of the study (1996 - 2004). There was a tendency toward better OS in patients with ovarian or pulmonary location of extrahepatic disease, although the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In patients with concomitant hepatic and extrahepatic metastases, complete resection of metastatic burden significantly prolong survival. The patients with up to 4 liver metastases, resectable by minor hepatectomy benefit the most from this aggressive onco-surgical management.

Comparative Analysis between Simultaneous Resection and Staged Resection for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases - A Single Center Experience on 300 Consecutive Patients.

Introduction: In synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLMs), simultaneous resection (SR) of the primary tumor and liver metastases has not gained wide acceptance. Most authors prefer staged resections (SgR), especially in patients presenting rectal cancer or requiring major hepatectomy. Methods: Morbidity, mortality, survival rates and length of hospital stay were compared between the two groups of patients (SR vs. SgR). A subgroup analysis was performed for patients with similar characteristics (e.g. rectal tumor, major hepatectomy, bilobar metastases, metastatic lymph nodes, preoperative chemotherapy). Results: Between 1995 and 2016, SR was performed in 234 patients, while 66 patients underwent SgR. Comparative morbidity (41% vs. 31.8%, respectively, p = 0.1997), mortality (3.8% vs. 3%, respectively, p = 1) and overall survival rates (85.8%, 51.3% and 30% vs. 87%, 49.6% and 22.5%, at 1-, 3- and 5-years, respectively, p = 0.386) were similar between the SR and SgR group. Mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients undergoing SR than SgR (15.11 ‚+- 8.60 vs. 19.42 ‚+- 7.36 days, respectively, p 0.0001). The characteristics of SR and SgR groups were similar, except the following parameters: rectal tumor (34.1% vs. 19.7%, respectively, p = 0.0245), metastatic lymph nodes (68.1% vs. 86.3%, respectively, p = 0.0383), bilobar liver metastases (22.6% vs. 37.8%, respectively, p = 0.0169), major hepatectomies (13.2% vs. 30.3%, respectively, p= 0.0025) and neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (13.2% vs. 77.2%, respectively, p 0.0001). A comparative analysis of morbidity, mortality and survival rates between SR and SgR was performed for subgroups of patients presenting these parameters. In each of these subgroups, SR was associated with similar morbidity, mortality and survival rates compared with SgR (p value 0.05). CONCLUSION: In patients with SCLMs, SR provides similar short-term and long-term outcomes as SgR, with a shorter hospital stay. Therefore, in most patients with SCLMs, SR might be considered the treatment of choice.