Background: The study explores the role of liver debulking surgery in cases of unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), challenging the traditional notion that surgery is not a valid option in such scenarios. Materials and methods: Patients with advanced but resectable disease who underwent surgery with a curative intent (Group I) and those with advanced incompletely resectable disease who underwent a “debulking” hepatectomy (Group II) were compared. Results: There was no difference in the intra-operative and post-operative results between the two groups. The 3-year and 5-year OS rates were 69% and 47% for group 1 vs 64% and 35% for group 2 respectively (p = 0.14). The 3-year and 5-year PFS rates were 32% and 21% for group 1 vs 12% and 8% for group 2 respectively (p = 0.009). Independent predictors of PFS in the debulking group were bilobar metastases (HR = 2.70; p = 0.02); the presence of extrahepatic metastasis (HR = 2.65, p = 0.03) and the presence of more than 9 metastases (HR = 2.37; p = 0.04). Iterative liver surgery for CRLM was a significant protective factor (HR = 0.34, p = 0.04). Conclusion: An aggressive palliative surgical approach may offer a survival benefit for selected patients with unresectable CRLM, without increasing the morbidity. The decision for surgery should be made on a case-by-case basis.

Debulking hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis: Analysis of risk factors for progression free survival / Mazzotta, A. D.; Usdin, N.; Samer, D.; Tribillon, E.; Gayet, B.; Fuks, D.; Louvet, C.; Soubrane, O.. - In: SURGICAL ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 0960-7404. - 55:(2024). [10.1016/j.suronc.2024.102056]

Debulking hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis: Analysis of risk factors for progression free survival

Mazzotta A. D.
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;
2024

Abstract

Background: The study explores the role of liver debulking surgery in cases of unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM), challenging the traditional notion that surgery is not a valid option in such scenarios. Materials and methods: Patients with advanced but resectable disease who underwent surgery with a curative intent (Group I) and those with advanced incompletely resectable disease who underwent a “debulking” hepatectomy (Group II) were compared. Results: There was no difference in the intra-operative and post-operative results between the two groups. The 3-year and 5-year OS rates were 69% and 47% for group 1 vs 64% and 35% for group 2 respectively (p = 0.14). The 3-year and 5-year PFS rates were 32% and 21% for group 1 vs 12% and 8% for group 2 respectively (p = 0.009). Independent predictors of PFS in the debulking group were bilobar metastases (HR = 2.70; p = 0.02); the presence of extrahepatic metastasis (HR = 2.65, p = 0.03) and the presence of more than 9 metastases (HR = 2.37; p = 0.04). Iterative liver surgery for CRLM was a significant protective factor (HR = 0.34, p = 0.04). Conclusion: An aggressive palliative surgical approach may offer a survival benefit for selected patients with unresectable CRLM, without increasing the morbidity. The decision for surgery should be made on a case-by-case basis.
2024
Chemotherapy; Colorectal liver metastasis; Hepatectomy; Liver resection; Progression; Surgical oncology; Survival
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Debulking hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis: Analysis of risk factors for progression free survival / Mazzotta, A. D.; Usdin, N.; Samer, D.; Tribillon, E.; Gayet, B.; Fuks, D.; Louvet, C.; Soubrane, O.. - In: SURGICAL ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 0960-7404. - 55:(2024). [10.1016/j.suronc.2024.102056]
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1727789
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact