| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Original Article |
1 Department of Surgical Oncology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Cancer Center, 39 Rue Camille Desmoulins, 94805 Villejuif Cedex, France
2 Department of Radiology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Cancer Center, 39 Rue Camille Desmoulins, 94805 Villejuif Cedex, France
Correspondence: Address correspondence and reprint requests to: D. Elias, MD, PhD; E-mail: elias{at}igr.fr.
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods: The data of 506 patients who underwent a laparotomy and then a hepatectomy for colorectal LM were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. All patients had undergone at least two types of preoperative liver imaging (but no fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography).
Results: Unsuspected metastases were discovered at laparotomy in 209 patients (41.3%). There were extrahepatic metastases in 82 patients (16.2%), additional LM in 152 patients (30%), and both in 25 patients (4.9%). Liver palpation and intraoperative ultrasound allowed for detecting additional LM in 125 (24.7%) and 48 (9.4%) patients, respectively. All of them were resected. When only the 124 patients who presented with 1 to 3 LM measuring <3 cm in diameter (candidates for percutaneous RF) were considered, the results were similar. Moreover, the incidence of unsuspected metastases was similar when the periods of surgery (before and after January 1996) were considered.
Conclusions: Laparotomy permits discovery of and treatment with a curative intent of unsuspected intrahepatic or extrahepatic metastases in at least one third of patients with classically resectable colorectal LM. This does not support the use of percutaneous RF ablation instead of hepatic resection for this population, because it will result in an important survival decrease.
Key Words: Liver metastases Colorectal cancer Hepatectomy Radiofrequency ablation Intraoperative ultrasonography
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The aim of this study was to discover the incidence of unsuspected intrahepatic and extrahepatic metastatic disease detection at laparotomy, when it is still treatable with curative intent. In other words, our aim was to discover the incidence of patients who would undergo incomplete treatment if treated only with percutaneous RF.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All patients underwent a laparotomy with thorough exploration of the abdominal cavity, notably in the area of the primary tumor. A meticulous palpation of the liver and then intraoperative ultrasonography (IOUS) with a Toshiba SSA-340A (Toshiba Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) linear imaging system equipped with a PVF-738H (Toshiba Co., Ltd.) linear array probe (5.07.0 MHz) were performed. By definition, all 506 patients were hepatectomized and underwent extrahepatic metastatic disease resection if necessary, with a curative intent. Their data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Their main characteristics are listed in Table 1
.
|
2 test or Fishers exact test, when appropriate, were used for univariate comparisons. Differences were considered significant at P = .05. | RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
1 cm. When considering only the 124 patients presenting 1 to 3 LM, all measuring <3 cm in diameter (eventual candidates for a percutaneous RF ablation), 27 (21.7%) had extrahepatic localizations unsuspected before surgery, and 35 (28.2%) had unsuspected LM. Five sustained new intrahepatic and extrahepatic localizations. Palpation of the liver allowed discovery of the additional LM in 33 of the 35 patients. Thus, the incidence of additional metastases in this group was similar to that in the group of patients who had more than three LM, LM >3 cm in diameter, or both.
The detection rate of extrahepatic metastases was correlated neither with the discovery of additional LM (P = .73) nor with a high number of LM (P = .89). However, additional LM were discovered significantly (P < .001) more frequently in patients who had more numerous LM before surgery: the incidence was 21.3% in the 328 patients with 1 to 3 LM, versus 49.4% in the 178 patients with >3 LM (the size of LM was not taken into account here).
When we considered the timing of surgery (before or after January 1996) to discover whether an improvement in imaging quality over the years would result in a decreased detection rate of additional LM at laparotomy, the results were similar: 30% in the 233 patients operated on before January 1996, versus 32.2% in the 273 operated on after this date. The results were the same for extrahepatic metastases.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Patient selection was performed in two steps. First, at the issue of a preoperative standard imaging, patients had to sustain resectable LM with a curative intent, sometimes with the planned resection of known extrahepatic metastases. Second, after laparotomy, they were finally included when all metastases known and unknown before surgery were deemed resectable and were resected.
It is clear that percutaneous RF ablation of LM in these patients would result in leaving untreated macroscopic tumor deposits in 41.3% of them. This number is not modified when considering only the patients with no more than three LM measuring <3 cm in diameter. Thus, currently, treating potentially resectable LM with percutaneous RF results in incomplete treatment in more than one third of patients in comparison with standard open surgery. Whether this results in a diminished cure rate for patients is harder to discern, but according to our previous studies of patients with intrahepatic plus extrahepatic metastases resected with a curative intent, their 5-year survival rate is 20% to 28% at 5 years.7,8
Additional LM were discovered in 30% of patients. Visual inspection and palpation of the liver allowed us to find most of these new metastases (24.7% of patients) because we always perform them before IOUS. This number is in accordance with other series in the literature. A recent study from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center14 established that among 111 patients evaluated from October 1997 to November 1998, additional hepatic tumors were found in 37 (33%). Twenty-one patients (19%) had new LM identified only by IOUS, whereas 16 (14%) had their LM discovered by palpation.14 Finally, in this series, extrahepatic metastases were discovered at laparotomy in 6.8% of patients. Other studies reported rates of 15.7% and 26%.15,16
Recent studies testing the efficiency of a laparoscopy plus laparoscopic ultrasonography report that they did not match the results of preoperative imaging studies in 33% to 44% of cases.1719 It is thus clear that a laparoscopic approach allows detecting most preoperatively unsuspected metastases. However, laparoscopy does not allow for manual palpation of the peritoneal cavity, which remains a fundamental gesture in surgery and the only one capable of detecting a peritoneal nodule trapped inside adhesions, a small-sized adenopathy, or an isoechoic LM. Hence, the vast majority of patients with potentially resectable hepatic colorectal metastases do not benefit from laparoscopy.20
Will fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography permit detection of more metastases during the preoperative period? Currently, it is mainly useful for detecting extrahepatic tumor sites21,22; however, it is considered that for a tumor
1 cm, the detection rate of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography is only 21%.21 Therefore, it is highly probable that its contribution will be real but limited in this field.
In conclusion, our data, like other current data, do not support the use of percutaneous RF ablation instead of hepatic resection of colorectal LM. Treating patients with resectable LM by RF will result in a marked survival loss.
Received for publication March 15, 2004. Accepted for publication November 30, 2004.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
L. B. J. van Iersel, H. Gelderblom, A. L. Vahrmeijer, E. L. van Persijn van Meerten, F. G. J. Tijl, H. Putter, H. H. Hartgrink, P. J. K. Kuppen, J. W. R. Nortier, R. A. E. M. Tollenaar, et al. Isolated hepatic melphalan perfusion of colorectal liver metastases: outcome and prognostic factors in 154 patients Ann. Onc., June 1, 2008; 19(6): 1127 - 1134. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Adam, D. A. Wicherts, R. J. de Haas, T. Aloia, F. Levi, B. Paule, C. Guettier, F. Kunstlinger, V. Delvart, D. Azoulay, et al. Complete Pathologic Response After Preoperative Chemotherapy for Colorectal Liver Metastases: Myth or Reality? J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2008; 26(10): 1635 - 1641. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Elias, S. Bonnet, C. Honore, N. Kohneh-Shahri, G. Tomasic, N. Lassau, C. Dromain, and D. Goere Comparison Between the Minimum Margin Defined on Preoperative Imaging and the Final Surgical Margin After Hepatectomy for Cancer: How to Manage It? Ann. Surg. Oncol., March 1, 2008; 15(3): 777 - 781. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Mulier, Y. Ni, J. Jamart, L. Michel, G. Marchal, and T. Ruers Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Resection for Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: Time for a Randomized Trial? Ann. Surg. Oncol., January 1, 2008; 15(1): 144 - 157. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Benoist, A. Brouquet, C. Penna, C. Julie, M. El Hajjam, S. Chagnon, E. Mitry, P. Rougier, and B. Nordlinger Complete Response of Colorectal Liver Metastases After Chemotherapy: Does It Mean Cure? J. Clin. Oncol., August 20, 2006; 24(24): 3939 - 3945. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |