R1 resection of colorectal liver metastasis - What is the cost of marginal resection?


Journal

Journal of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1096-9098
Titre abrégé: J Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0222643

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Historique:
received: 24 08 2018
accepted: 13 11 2018
pubmed: 15 12 2018
medline: 2 2 2019
entrez: 15 12 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The impact of resection margins on the outcome of patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) remains controversial. We evaluated the short and long-term results of R1 resection. Between 2006 and 2016, 202 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM. R1 resection was defined as a distance of less than 1 mm between tumor cells and the transection plain. Patient and tumor characteristics, perioperative, and long-term outcomes were assessed. In 161 (79.7%) and 41 (20.3%) patients, an R0 and R1 resections were achieved, respectively. Patients that underwent an R1 resection had higher rates of disease progression while on chemotherapy (12.1% vs 5.5%, P = 0.001), need for second-line chemotherapy (17% vs 6.2%, P < 0.001), increased use of preoperative volume manipulation (14.6% vs 5.5%, P = 0.001), and inferior vena-cava involvement (21.9% vs 8.7%, P < 0.001). These patients had higher rates of major postoperative complications (19.5% vs 6.8%, P < 0.001) and reoperations (7.3% vs 2.4%, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that R1 resections were not associated with decreased recurrence-free survival or overall survival. Although R1 resection is associated with worse disease behavior and postoperative complications, the long-term outcome of patients following an R1 resection is non-inferior to those who underwent an R0 resection.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
The impact of resection margins on the outcome of patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) remains controversial. We evaluated the short and long-term results of R1 resection.
METHODS METHODS
Between 2006 and 2016, 202 patients underwent liver resection for CRLM. R1 resection was defined as a distance of less than 1 mm between tumor cells and the transection plain. Patient and tumor characteristics, perioperative, and long-term outcomes were assessed.
RESULTS RESULTS
In 161 (79.7%) and 41 (20.3%) patients, an R0 and R1 resections were achieved, respectively. Patients that underwent an R1 resection had higher rates of disease progression while on chemotherapy (12.1% vs 5.5%, P = 0.001), need for second-line chemotherapy (17% vs 6.2%, P < 0.001), increased use of preoperative volume manipulation (14.6% vs 5.5%, P = 0.001), and inferior vena-cava involvement (21.9% vs 8.7%, P < 0.001). These patients had higher rates of major postoperative complications (19.5% vs 6.8%, P < 0.001) and reoperations (7.3% vs 2.4%, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that R1 resections were not associated with decreased recurrence-free survival or overall survival.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Although R1 resection is associated with worse disease behavior and postoperative complications, the long-term outcome of patients following an R1 resection is non-inferior to those who underwent an R0 resection.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30548552
doi: 10.1002/jso.25321
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

347-354

Informations de copyright

© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Auteurs

Niv Pencovich (N)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Rotem Houli (R)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Nir Lubezky (N)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Yaacov Goykhman (Y)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Richard Nakache (R)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Joseph M Klausner (JM)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Ido Nachmany (I)

Department of General Surgery B, Division of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, The Nikolas & Elizabeth Shlezak Fund for Experimental Surgery, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH