Trends and Outcomes of the Liver-First Surgical Approach for Patients with Colorectal Cancer and Isolated Liver Metastases.
2/5 보강
TL;DR
Compared with CRLR, the LRCR approach was associated with better overall survival, lower postoperative mortality and fewer readmissions after colon/rectal resection.
PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 3/4)
유사 논문P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
959 patients, 1178 underwent LRCR and 9781 underwent CRLR.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
resection of primary CRC and liver metastases
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
[CONCLUSION] The LRCR approach has been increasingly used over time. Compared with CRLR, the LRCR approach was associated with better overall survival, lower postoperative mortality and fewer readmissions after colon/rectal resection.
OpenAlex 토픽 ·
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Compared with CRLR, the LRCR approach was associated with better overall survival, lower postoperative mortality and fewer readmissions after colon/rectal resection.
- p-value p < 0.01
- p-value p<0.01
- 95% CI 1.25-6.00
APA
Bryant Morocho, Sasha Lightfoot, et al. (2026). Trends and Outcomes of the Liver-First Surgical Approach for Patients with Colorectal Cancer and Isolated Liver Metastases.. Annals of surgical oncology, 33(5), 3910-3921. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-026-19180-5
MLA
Bryant Morocho, et al.. "Trends and Outcomes of the Liver-First Surgical Approach for Patients with Colorectal Cancer and Isolated Liver Metastases.." Annals of surgical oncology, vol. 33, no. 5, 2026, pp. 3910-3921.
PMID
41634525 ↗
Abstract 한글 요약
[BACKGROUND] The optimal sequencing for resection of primary and liver metastases in stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains debated. This study evaluated utilization trends and outcomes of liver resection before colon/rectal resections.
[METHODS] A retrospective analysis was performed using the National Cancer Database (2010-2020) for patients with stage IV CRC and isolated liver metastases who underwent resection of primary CRC and liver metastases. The study identified two cohort groups: a group that underwent liver resection before colon/rectal resection (LRCR) and a group that underwent colon/rectal resection synchronous with or before liver resection (CRLR). Overall survival (OR) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models, whereas logistic regression was used for binary outcomes.
[RESULTS] Among 10,959 patients, 1178 underwent LRCR and 9781 underwent CRLR. Utilization of LRCR increased from 5.37% in 2010 to 15.43% in 2020. Predictors of LRCR utilization included rectal primary sites (OR, 5.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.55-7.60) and academic treatment facilities (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.25-6.00). Predictors of lower LRCR included lymphovascular invasion (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.87) and moderate (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.95) to poorly differentiated (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.81) pathology. Patients undergoing the LRCR approach were associated with better overall survival than those undergoing CRLR (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99). The 90-day mortality (1.11% vs 4.47%; p < 0.01) and 30-day readmissions (3.69% vs 5.81%; p<0.01) after primary tumor resection were lower in the LRCR group.
[CONCLUSION] The LRCR approach has been increasingly used over time. Compared with CRLR, the LRCR approach was associated with better overall survival, lower postoperative mortality and fewer readmissions after colon/rectal resection.
[METHODS] A retrospective analysis was performed using the National Cancer Database (2010-2020) for patients with stage IV CRC and isolated liver metastases who underwent resection of primary CRC and liver metastases. The study identified two cohort groups: a group that underwent liver resection before colon/rectal resection (LRCR) and a group that underwent colon/rectal resection synchronous with or before liver resection (CRLR). Overall survival (OR) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models, whereas logistic regression was used for binary outcomes.
[RESULTS] Among 10,959 patients, 1178 underwent LRCR and 9781 underwent CRLR. Utilization of LRCR increased from 5.37% in 2010 to 15.43% in 2020. Predictors of LRCR utilization included rectal primary sites (OR, 5.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.55-7.60) and academic treatment facilities (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.25-6.00). Predictors of lower LRCR included lymphovascular invasion (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.87) and moderate (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.95) to poorly differentiated (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.81) pathology. Patients undergoing the LRCR approach were associated with better overall survival than those undergoing CRLR (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99). The 90-day mortality (1.11% vs 4.47%; p < 0.01) and 30-day readmissions (3.69% vs 5.81%; p<0.01) after primary tumor resection were lower in the LRCR group.
[CONCLUSION] The LRCR approach has been increasingly used over time. Compared with CRLR, the LRCR approach was associated with better overall survival, lower postoperative mortality and fewer readmissions after colon/rectal resection.
🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만
같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (1)
🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반
- A Phase I Study of Hydroxychloroquine and Suba-Itraconazole in Men with Biochemical Relapse of Prostate Cancer (HITMAN-PC): Dose Escalation Results.
- Self-management of male urinary symptoms: qualitative findings from a primary care trial.
- Clinical and Liquid Biomarkers of 20-Year Prostate Cancer Risk in Men Aged 45 to 70 Years.
- Diagnostic accuracy of Ga-PSMA PET/CT versus multiparametric MRI for preoperative pelvic invasion in the patients with prostate cancer.
- Comprehensive analysis of androgen receptor splice variant target gene expression in prostate cancer.
- Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Surgery for Thyroid Cancer.