Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNISR
  • ×
  • Home
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Organizations
  • Expertise & Skills

UNIFIND
Logo UNISR

|

UNIFIND

unisr.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • People
  • Outputs
  • Organizations
  • Expertise & Skills
  1. Outputs

Impact of type of liver resection on the outcome of colorectal liver metastases: A case-matched analysis

Academic Article
Publication Date:
2008
Short description:
Impact of type of liver resection on the outcome of colorectal liver metastases: A case-matched analysis / Guzzetti, Eleonora; Pulitano, Carlo; Catena, Marco; Arru, Marcella; Ratti, Francesca; Finazzi, Renato; Aldrighetti, L; Ferla, Gianfranco. - In: JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 0022-4790. - 97:6(2008), pp. 503-507. [10.1002/jso.20979]
abstract:
Background: Wedge resection (WR) for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) has become more common in an attempt to preserve liver parenchyma. However, some investigator have reported that WR is associated with a higher incidence of positive margin and an inferior survival compared with anatomic resection (AR) [1]. Objectives: This study evaluated survival, margin status, and pattern of recurrence of patients with CLM treated with WR or AR. Methods: We identified 208 consecutive patients, in a single institutional database from 1995 to 2004, who underwent either WR or AR. WR was defined as a nonanatomic resection and AR was defined as single resection of one or two liver segments. Patients with combined WR-AR and patients requiring resection of more than two segments or radiofrequency ablation were excluded from the analysis. Results: One hundred six patients underwent WR and 102 patients had AR. There were no differences in the rate of positive surgical margin (P = 0.146), overall recurrence rates (P = 0.211), and patterns of recurrence between the two groups (P = 0.468). The median survival was 32 months for WR and 42 for AR, with 5-year survival rates of 29% and 27% respectively, with no significant difference (P = 0.308). Morbidity was similar between the two groups. Conclusions: WR is a safe procedure and does not disadvantage the patients in terms of tumor recurrence and overall survival.
Iris type:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
List of contributors:
Guzzetti, Eleonora; Pulitano, Carlo; Catena, Marco; Arru, Marcella; Ratti, Francesca; Finazzi, Renato; Aldrighetti, L; Ferla, Gianfranco
Authors of the University:
RATTI FRANCESCA
Handle:
https://iris.unisr.it/handle/20.500.11768/93642
Published in:
JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Journal
  • Use of cookies

Powered by VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.5.2.0