An approach to the newly diagnosed colorectal cancer patient with synchronous stage 4 disease.

At initial presentation, 20% to 30% of patients with colon and rectal cancer have detectable metastatic disease. Precise guidelines are lacking for the treatment of this special subset. Most of these patients have only hepatic metastases. Treatment recommendations for these stage 4 patients must take into account characteristics of the primary tumor, the potential resectability of the metastatic disease, and the proper role of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Because of the tremendous variability of these characteristics, recommendations must be individualized. This article is a basic approach to the treatment of these patients.

Practice parameters for the management of rectal cancer (revised).

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons is dedicated to assuring high-quality patient care by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. The Standards Committee is composed of Society members who are chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery. This Committee was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus. This is accompanied by developing Clinical Practice Guidelines based on the best available evidence. These guidelines are inclusive, and not prescriptive. Their purpose is to provide information on which decisions can be made, rather than dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, health care workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all of the circumstances presented by the individual patient.

Hepatic resection at a major community-based teaching hospital can result in good outcome.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between volume and outcome has been established in the literature for several complex surgical procedures. Improved outcome has been suggested at high-volume hospitals or with high-volume surgeons. METHODS: The objective of this study was to evaluate the experience of a low-volume hospital with major liver resections. The setting of the study was a community-based teaching hospital with a surgical residency training program. RESULTS: A total of 46 major liver resections were performed between January 1992 and December 2002. Procedures performed were hepatic lobectomies (n = 15; right, n = 11; left, n = 4), trisegmentectomies (n = 5; right, n = 3; left, n = 2), segmentectomies (n = 16; left lateral, n = 12; right posterior, n = 4), and wedge resections (n = 10). Operations were performed by 14 different surgeons; however, 23 operations were performed by 1 surgeon. Sixteen patients (34%) developed 23 complications. The average length of hospital stay was 9.7 days. There were no 30-day postoperative mortalities. Out of 46 patients who underwent major liver resection over the last 10 years, 13 patients are still alive. Overall survival ranged from 3 to 84 months, with a median survival of 30.6 months. The actual 5-year survival was 36% (8 of 22) for all patients operated on >5 years ago, and the actual 2-year survival was 61% (20 of 33). CONCLUSIONS: Major liver resection can be performed safely with low rates of morbidity and operative mortality with careful selection of patients at a low-volume community-based teaching hospital.