ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2018
The Prognostic Value of Varying Definitions of Positive Resection Margin in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiofrequency ablation combined with systemic therapy versus systemic therapy alone for unresectable colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- The Margin of the Largest Tumor Predicts Overall Survival After Resection of Multitumor Colorectal Liver Metastases.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Prognostic effect of surgical margin in patients undergoing hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastasis.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- Review
- Label-free multiphoton microscopy enables histopathological assessment of colorectal liver metastases and supports automated classification of neoplastic tissue.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Is an R1 Hepatic Resection Accepted?Clinics and practice · 2022Review
- Optimizing the Personalized Care for the Management of Rectal Cancer: A Consensus Statement.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Systemic Therapy and Its Surgical Implications in Patients with Resectable Liver Colorectal Cancer Metastases. A Report from the Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Analysis of survival factors after hepatic resection for colorectal cancer liver metastases: Does the R1 margin matter?Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal liver metastases: A contemporary review of the literature.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- Two-Stage Hepatectomy for Bilateral Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Multi-institutional Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Colorectal cancer liver metastases within the central and peripheral segments: Parenchymal sparing surgery adaptation.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Article
- Proposal of Two Prognostic Models for the Prediction of 10-Year Survival after Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases.HPB surgery : a world journal of hepatic, pancreatic and biliary surgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVarying definitions of resection margin clearance are currently employed among patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM). Specifically, a microscopically positive margin (R1) has alternatively been equated with an involved margin (margin width = 0 mm) or a margin width < 1 mm. Consequently, patients with a margin width of 0-1 mm (sub-mm) are inconsistently classified in either the R0 or R1 categories, thus obscuring the prognostic implications of sub-mm margins.
methodsSix hundred thirty-three patients who underwent resection of CRLM were identified. Both R1 definitions were alternatively employed and multivariable analysis was used to determine the predictive power of each definition, as well as the prognostic implications of a sub-mm margin.
resultsFive hundred thirty-nine (85.2%) patients had a margin width ≥ 1 mm, 42 had a sub-mm margin width, and 52 had an involved margin (0 mm). A margin width ≥ 1 mm was associated with improved survival vs. a sub-mm margin (65 vs. 36 months; P = 0.03) or an involved margin (65 vs. 33 months; P < 0.001). No significant difference in survival was detected between patients with involved vs. sub-mm margins (P = 0.31). A sub-mm margin and an involved margin were both independent predictors of worse OS (HR 1.66, 1.04-2.67; P = 0.04, and HR 2.14, 1.46-3.16; P < 0.001, respectively) in multivariable analysis. Importantly, after combining the two definitions, patients with either an involved margin or a sub-mm margin were associated with worse OS in multivariable analysis (HR 1.94, 1.41-2.65; P < 0.001).
conclusionsPatients with involved or sub-mm margins demonstrated a similar inferior OS vs. patients with a margin width > 1 mm. Consequently, a uniform definition of R1 as a margin width < 1 mm should perhaps be employed by future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29633114What 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.