Surgical outcomes of two-stage hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis: comparison to a benchmark procedure.
Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH)
ablation
bi-lobar
colorectal liver metastasis
patient selection
Journal
Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition
ISSN: 2304-3881
Titre abrégé: Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr
Pays: China (Republic : 1949- )
ID NLM: 101600750
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
entrez:
19
3
2019
pubmed:
19
3
2019
medline:
19
3
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) with portal vein embolization (PVE) is associated with high morbidity and mortality and may result in liver failure due to insufficient future liver remnant. The objectives of this investigation were to evaluate the short-term outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis who underwent TSH with PVE, and to critically review the selection criteria for TSH-PVE. A retrospective review of all patients who were operated due to bi-lobar CRLM during the years 2007-2017 was performed. Patients who underwent TSH-PVE were compared to those who underwent right hepatectomy (RH) only. Twenty-nine patient underwent TSH, 25 of whom (86.2%) completed both stages. These patients demonstrated a major complication rate of 17%, and a 90-day mortality rate of 3.4%. Most complications (80%) were related to the colonic resection, and one patient developed liver failure. Patients who suffered complications had a trend towards more baseline comorbidities and more liver lesions. Ablative techniques were utilized in 76%. When compared to 35 patients who underwent sole RH, no significant difference was demonstrated in major complication rate (20%) or mortality (0%). TSH is a relatively safe procedure in selected patients. Ablative techniques can reduce the occurrence of liver insufficiency and should be used liberally when possible. Factors such as number of lesions, comorbidities and the timing of colonic resection should be considered and evaluated in order to improve the outcomes of the procedure.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Two-stage hepatectomy (TSH) with portal vein embolization (PVE) is associated with high morbidity and mortality and may result in liver failure due to insufficient future liver remnant. The objectives of this investigation were to evaluate the short-term outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastasis who underwent TSH with PVE, and to critically review the selection criteria for TSH-PVE.
METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective review of all patients who were operated due to bi-lobar CRLM during the years 2007-2017 was performed. Patients who underwent TSH-PVE were compared to those who underwent right hepatectomy (RH) only.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twenty-nine patient underwent TSH, 25 of whom (86.2%) completed both stages. These patients demonstrated a major complication rate of 17%, and a 90-day mortality rate of 3.4%. Most complications (80%) were related to the colonic resection, and one patient developed liver failure. Patients who suffered complications had a trend towards more baseline comorbidities and more liver lesions. Ablative techniques were utilized in 76%. When compared to 35 patients who underwent sole RH, no significant difference was demonstrated in major complication rate (20%) or mortality (0%).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
TSH is a relatively safe procedure in selected patients. Ablative techniques can reduce the occurrence of liver insufficiency and should be used liberally when possible. Factors such as number of lesions, comorbidities and the timing of colonic resection should be considered and evaluated in order to improve the outcomes of the procedure.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30881963
doi: 10.21037/hbsn.2018.12.02
pii: hbsn-08-01-29
pmc: PMC6383016
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
29-36Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Ann Surg. 2000 Apr;231(4):480-6
pubmed: 10749607
Ann Surg. 2000 May;231(5):743-51
pubmed: 10767796
Ann Surg. 2000 Dec;232(6):777-85
pubmed: 11088072
Ann Surg. 2003 Feb;237(2):208-17
pubmed: 12560779
Ann Surg Oncol. 2003 Nov;10(9):1059-69
pubmed: 14597445
Lancet Oncol. 2005 Feb;6(2):73
pubmed: 15704298
Tunis Med. 2005 Feb;83(2):91-7
pubmed: 15969231
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007 Apr;33(3):329-35
pubmed: 17140759
Dig Surg. 2008;25(5):387-93
pubmed: 19033722
HPB (Oxford). 2010 May;12(4):262-9
pubmed: 20590896
Br J Surg. 2010 Sep;97(9):1354-62
pubmed: 20603857
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar 10;29(8):1083-90
pubmed: 21263087
Br J Surg. 2011 Oct;98(10):1463-75
pubmed: 21710481
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Apr;19(4):1310-5
pubmed: 21947627
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012 Mar;38(3):266-73
pubmed: 22244437
Br J Surg. 1990 Nov;77(11):1241-6
pubmed: 2253003
HPB (Oxford). 2013 Jun;15(6):411-7
pubmed: 23458579
Surgery. 2015 Mar;157(3):444-53
pubmed: 25633729
Ann Surg. 2015 Nov;262(5):772-8; discussion 778-9
pubmed: 26583665
Ann Surg. 1989 Aug;210(2):127-38
pubmed: 2667471
Surg Case Rep. 2018 Feb 16;4(1):17
pubmed: 29453737
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Nov 1;4(11):1553-1568
pubmed: 29860482
Surgery. 1988 Mar;103(3):278-88
pubmed: 3278402
Ann Surg. 1984 Mar;199(3):306-16
pubmed: 6703792
Arch Surg. 1984 Jun;119(6):647-51
pubmed: 6732473
World J Surg. 1995 Jan-Feb;19(1):59-71
pubmed: 7740812
Br J Surg. 1997 Jul;84(7):977-80
pubmed: 9240140