ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2014
Selection criteria for combined resection of synchronous colorectal cancer hepatic metastases: a cautionary note.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with bevacizumab for resectable colorectal liver metastasis with risk factors for recurrence: a multicenter real-world study.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Synchronous hepatic metastasis and metachronous Krukenberg tumor from advanced colon cancer. A case report with an unexpected disease-free survival.International journal of surgery case reports · 2017Article
- Recent publications by ochsner authors.Ochsner journal · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCombined resection of primary colorectal cancer and synchronous hepatic metastases has been shown to be safe and associated with acceptable oncologic outcomes in selected patients. The purpose of this study was to determine if selection criteria for combined resection could be identified using major morbidity or mortality as an avoidable outcome.
methodsWe queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program dataset from 2005 to 2010 for combined liver and colorectal resections for colorectal cancer using procedure and diagnosis codes. These patients were compared to colorectal cancer patients receiving colectomy alone and patients receiving liver-directed surgery for secondary liver cancer.
resultsDuring the study period, 1,641 (53.1 %) of patients underwent colectomy alone, 1,113 (36 %) underwent liver-directed surgery alone, and 334 (10.9 %) underwent combined colectomy and liver-directed surgery for colorectal cancer. The combined patient population had statistically significant increases in American Society of Anesthesiologists class, preoperative ascites, preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome/sepsis, weight loss, functional dependence, and decreased serum albumin compared to the other cohorts. While major hepatectomy was less frequent in the combined cohort, the rate of rectal resection was similar to the colectomy-alone cohort. These selection disparities resulted in a subsequent increase in composite major morbidity, return to operating room, infectious complications, and length of stay in combined patients.
conclusionsWhile combined resection in patients with synchronous colorectal cancer hepatic metastases may be feasible, it is associated with considerable increase in morbidity without application of stringent selection criteria. We recommend only patients without known risk factors for perioperative morbidity and infectious complications be considered for this approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.