ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2020
Anatomic Resection Is Not Required for Colorectal Liver Metastases with RAS Mutation.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Precision Surgery Applicable to Colorectal Liver Metastases? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies that Investigate the Association of Surgical Technique with Outcomes in the Context of Distinct Tumor Biology.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of parenchymal-sparing versus anatomic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Review
- A Comparison of 11 Clinical Risk Scores for Prediction of Survival After Curative-Intent Resection of Colorectal Liver Metastases.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Planned Liver Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy for Residual Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases After Surgery: A Single-Arm Retrospective Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Review
- Outcomes of different parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies in patients with colorectal liver metastases and prognostic impact of peritumoral imaging features.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Article
- Impact of Molecular Status on Metastasectomy of Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2023Review
- Surgical approach to achieve R0 resections in primary and metastatic liver tumors: a literature review.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Review
- Precision Surgery of Colorectal Liver Metastases in the Current Era: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2023Review
- Precision surgery for colorectal liver metastases: Current knowledge and future perspectives.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2022Review
- Colorectal liver metastases: state-of-the-art management and surgical approaches.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Review
- Gene Alterations, Mediators, and Artificial Intelligence in Colorectal Liver Metastases.Cells · 2022Article
- Review
- Prognostic and Therapeutic Implications of Tumor Biology, Including Gene Alterations, in Colorectal Liver Metastases.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Review
- Integrative Concepts for Liver Surgery.Visceral medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNon-anatomic resection (NAR) has emerged as a safe and effective technique for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). More recently, RAS mutation has been identified as an important indicator of aggressive disease, which may require anatomic resection (AR). In this retrospective study, we compared the long-term outcomes of AR versus NAR in CRLM patients with and without RAS mutations.
methodsPatients with known RAS mutation status who underwent AR or NAR for CRLM between 2006 and 2016 were included. Differences in baseline characteristics were adjusted using 1:1 propensity score matching, including the most important factors that contributed to the decision to use the resection technique. Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and liver-specific recurrence-free survival (L-RFS) were compared between cohorts.
resultsAmong 622 total patients, 338 (54%) underwent AR and 284 (46%) NAR. There was no difference in OS or L-RFS between the AR and NAR groups, regardless of mutation status. There was increased RFS in the RAS WT patients with NAR (P = 0.034), but no difference in RFS in the whole cohort or RAS mutant group. After propensity score matching, 360 patients were analyzed, and no differences in OS, RFS, or L-RFS rates were seen between any groups. There was also no difference in margin recurrence.
conclusionsSimilar outcomes can be achieved with both AR and NAR, regardless of RAS mutation status. These data do not support a universal requirement for AR in RAS mutant CRLM when not necessary to achieve an R0 resection.
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.