Suppr超能文献

同步性结直肠癌肝转移的原发肿瘤与肝优先治疗方法:一项基于法国外科协会(AFC)多中心研究及倾向评分分析

Primary Tumor Versus Liver-First Approach for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases: An Association Française de Chirurgie (AFC) Multicenter-Based Study with Propensity Score Analysis.

作者信息

Esposito Francesco, Lim Chetana, Sa Cunha Antonio, Pessaux Patrick, Navarro Francis, Azoulay Daniel

机构信息

Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Henri Mondor Hospital, Université Paris-Est (UPEC), 51 Avenue de Lattre de Tassigny, 94010, Créteil, France.

Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Paul Brousse Hospital, Villejuif, France.

出版信息

World J Surg. 2018 Dec;42(12):4046-4053. doi: 10.1007/s00268-018-4711-x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Multicenter studies comparing the reverse strategy (RS) with the classical strategy (CS) for the management of stage IVA liver-only colorectal cancer (CCR) are scarce. The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival and recurrence patterns following use of the CS and RS.

METHOD

This retrospective multicenter review collected data from all consecutive patients with stage IVA liver-only CCR who underwent staged resection of CCR and liver metastases (LM) at 24 French hospitals between 2006 and 2013 and were retrospectively analyzed. Patients who underwent simultaneous liver and CCR resection, those with synchronous extrahepatic metastasis, and those who underwent emergent CCR resection were excluded. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates and recurrence patterns were investigated before and after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

A total of 653 patients were included: 587 (89.9%) in the CS group and 66 (10.1%) in the RS group. Compared with the CS patients, RS patients were more likely to have rectal cancer (43.9 vs. 24.9%; p = 0.006), larger liver tumor size (52.5 ± 38.6 vs. 39.6 ± 30 mm; p = 0.01), and more positive lymph nodes (62.1 vs. 44.8%; p = 0.009). OS was not different between the two groups (75 vs. 72% at 5 years; p = 0.77), while RFS was worse in the RS group (24 vs. 33% at 5 years; p = 0.01). Time to recurrence at any site (1.8 vs. 2.4 years, p = 0.024) and intrahepatic recurrence (1.7 vs. 2.2 years, p = 0.014) were significantly shorter in the RS group than in the CS group. After PSM (63 patients in each group), no significant difference was found between the two groups in OS (p = 0.35), RFS (p = 0.62), time to recurrence at any site (p = 0.19), or intrahepatic recurrence (p = 0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, approximately 10% of patients with CCR and synchronous LM were offered surgery with the RS. Both strategies ensured similar oncological outcomes.

摘要

目的

比较反向策略(RS)与经典策略(CS)用于治疗仅肝转移的IVA期结直肠癌(CCR)的多中心研究较少。本研究的目的是比较采用CS和RS后的长期生存率和复发模式。

方法

这项回顾性多中心研究收集了2006年至2013年间在24家法国医院接受分期切除CCR和肝转移瘤(LM)的所有连续性仅肝转移IVA期CCR患者的数据,并进行回顾性分析。排除同时进行肝脏和CCR切除的患者、伴有同步肝外转移的患者以及接受急诊CCR切除的患者。在倾向评分匹配(PSM)前后,研究总生存率(OS)、无复发生存率(RFS)以及复发模式。

结果

共纳入653例患者:CS组587例(89.9%),RS组66例(10.1%)。与CS组患者相比,RS组患者更易患直肠癌(43.9%对24.9%;p = 0.006)、肝肿瘤更大(52.5±38.6对39.6±30mm;p = 0.01)以及阳性淋巴结更多(62.1%对44.8%;p = 0.009)。两组的OS无差异(5年时分别为75%和72%;p = 0.77),而RS组的RFS更差(5年时分别为24%和33%;p = 0.01)。RS组任何部位的复发时间(1.8对2.4年,p = 0.024)和肝内复发时间(1.

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