ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2019
Simultaneous, Delayed and Liver-First Hepatic Resections for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Resection Sequence in Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastasis: Primary vs. Liver First.Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Combined Resection Approaches: Decision Making for Synchronous Resection, Timing of Staged Intervention to Optimize Outcome.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2024Review
- Treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: multicentre comparison of two treatment strategies.The British journal of surgery · 2023Article
- Global survey on the surgical management of patients affected by colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: impact of surgical specialty and geographic region.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Which surgical strategy for colorectal cancer with synchronous hepatic metastases provides the best outcome? A comparison between primary first, liver first and simultaneous approach.Updates in surgery · 2022Article
- Review
- Synchronous liver and peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer: Is cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy combined with liver resection a feasible option?Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Liver-First Approach for Synchronous Colorectal Metastases: Analysis of 7360 Patients from the LiverMetSurvey Registry.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Simultaneous colorectal and parenchymal-sparing liver resection for advanced colorectal carcinoma with synchronous liver metastases: Between conventional and mini-invasive approaches.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Review
- Colorectal liver metastases: Current management and future perspectives.World journal of clinical oncology · 2020Review
- Synchronous colorectal liver metastases: timing of resection and patterns of referral.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSystematic reviews and meta-analyses that compare simultaneous, delayed and liver-first approach for synchronous colorectal liver metastases have found no significant differences. The aim of this study was to determine the best treatment strategy on the basis of effect sizes and the probabilities of treatment ranking by using a network meta-analysis. Moreover, first-time pairwise and network meta-analyses were used to estimate the existing evidence, and their results were compared to detect any discrepancies between them.
methodsSystematic review, pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed. The primary and secondary outcomes were 5-year overall survival and postoperative major morbidity, respectively.
resultsNo significant differences in long-term survival and major morbidity were found amongst the three approaches. The hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for 5-year overall survival for the simultaneous, delayed and liver-first approaches were 0.93 (0.69 - 1.24, P = 0.613), 0.97 (0.87 - 1.07, P = 0.596) and 0.90 (0.67 - 1.22, P = 0.499), respectively. Moreover, the liver-first approach with a surface under the cumulative ranking area score of 89% was ranked as the potentially best treatment option based on probabilities of treatment ranking.
conclusionsOn the basis of the relative ranking of treatments, the liver-first approach ranked first, followed by the delayed and simultaneous approaches. Therefore, a three-arm randomized controlled trial that compares the liver-first, simultaneous and delayed approaches needs to shed further light as to which is the best treatment option.
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.