Suppr超能文献

在结直肠癌肝转移手术中,肿瘤与血管结构分离等同于R0切除吗?一项观察性队列研究。

Is Tumor Detachment from Vascular Structures Equivalent to R0 Resection in Surgery for Colorectal Liver Metastases? An Observational Cohort.

作者信息

Viganò Luca, Procopio Fabio, Cimino Matteo Maria, Donadon Matteo, Gatti Andrea, Costa Guido, Del Fabbro Daniele, Torzilli Guido

机构信息

Department of Hepatobiliary & General Surgery, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center - IRCCS, Humanitas University, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Apr;23(4):1352-60. doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-5009-y. Epub 2015 Dec 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

R0 resection is the standard for colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). Adequacy of R1 resections is debated. Detachment of CLMs from vessels has been proposed to prioritize parenchyma sparing and increase resectability, but outcomes are still to be elucidated. The present study aimed to clarify the outcomes of R1 surgery (margin <1 mm) in patients with CLMs, distinguishing standard R1 resection (parenchymal margin, R1Par) and R1 resection with detachment of CLMs from major intrahepatic vessels (R1Vasc).

METHODS

All patients undergoing first resection between 2004 and June 2013 were prospectively considered. R0, R1Par, and R1Vasc were compared in per-patient and per-resection area analyses.

RESULTS

The study included 627 resection areas in 226 consecutive patients. Fifty-one (8.1 %) resections in 46 (20.4 %) patients were R1Vasc, and 177 (28.2 %) resections in 107 (47.3 %) patients were R1Par. Thirty-two (5.1 %) surgical margin recurrences occurred in 28 (12.4 %) patients. Local recurrence risk was similar between the R0 and R1Vasc groups (per-patient analysis 5.3 vs. 4.3 %; per-resection area analysis 1.5 vs. 3.9 %, p = n.s.) but increased in the R1Par group (19.6 and 13.6 %, p < 0.05 for both). The R1Par group had a higher rate of hepatic-only recurrences (49.5 vs. 36.1 %, p = 0.042). On multivariate analysis, R1Par was an independent negative prognostic factor of overall survival (p = 0.034, median follow-up 33 months); conversely R1Vasc versus R0 had no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

R1Par resection is not adequate for CLMs. R1Vasc surgery achieves outcomes equivalent to R0 resection. CLM detachment from intrahepatic vessels can be pursued to increase patient resectability and resection safety (parenchymal sparing).

摘要

背景

R0切除是结直肠癌肝转移(CLM)的标准术式。R1切除的充分性存在争议。有人提出将CLM与血管分离以优先保留实质并提高可切除性,但其预后仍有待阐明。本研究旨在明确CLM患者R1手术(切缘<1mm)的预后,区分标准R1切除(实质切缘,R1Par)和CLM与肝内主要血管分离的R1切除(R1Vasc)。

方法

前瞻性纳入2004年至2013年6月期间接受首次切除的所有患者。在患者个体分析和切除区域分析中对R0、R1Par和R1Vasc进行比较。

结果

该研究纳入了226例连续患者的627个切除区域。46例(20.4%)患者中的51例(8.1%)切除为R1Vasc,107例(47.3%)患者中的177例(28.2%)切除为R1Par。28例(12.4%)患者发生了32例(5.1%)手术切缘复发。R0组和R1Vasc组的局部复发风险相似(患者个体分析5.3%对4.3%;切除区域分析1.5%对3.9%,p=无统计学差异),但R1Par组增加(分别为19.6%和13.6%,两者p<0.05)。R1Par组单纯肝内复发率更高(49.5%对36.1%,p=0.042)。多因素分析显示,R1Par是总生存的独立负性预后因素(p=0.034,中位随访33个月);相反,R1Vasc与R0相比无显著差异。

结论

R1Par切除对CLM而言并不充分。R1Vasc手术的预后与R0切除相当。可采用CLM与肝内血管分离的方法来提高患者的可切除性和切除安全性(保留实质)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验