ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2026
Trends and Outcomes of the Liver-First Surgical Approach for Patients with Colorectal Cancer and Isolated Liver Metastases.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Colorectal cancer liver metastasis: immunosuppressive microenvironment, signaling pathways, and emerging therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal sequencing for resection of primary and liver metastases in stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains debated. This study evaluated utilization trends and outcomes of liver resection before colon/rectal resections.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed using the National Cancer Database (2010-2020) for patients with stage IV CRC and isolated liver metastases who underwent resection of primary CRC and liver metastases. The study identified two cohort groups: a group that underwent liver resection before colon/rectal resection (LRCR) and a group that underwent colon/rectal resection synchronous with or before liver resection (CRLR). Overall survival (OR) was evaluated using Cox proportional hazard models, whereas logistic regression was used for binary outcomes.
resultsAmong 10,959 patients, 1178 underwent LRCR and 9781 underwent CRLR. Utilization of LRCR increased from 5.37% in 2010 to 15.43% in 2020. Predictors of LRCR utilization included rectal primary sites (OR, 5.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.55-7.60) and academic treatment facilities (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.25-6.00). Predictors of lower LRCR included lymphovascular invasion (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.87) and moderate (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.39-0.95) to poorly differentiated (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.81) pathology. Patients undergoing the LRCR approach were associated with better overall survival than those undergoing CRLR (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99). The 90-day mortality (1.11% vs 4.47%; p < 0.01) and 30-day readmissions (3.69% vs 5.81%; p<0.01) after primary tumor resection were lower in the LRCR group.
conclusionThe LRCR approach has been increasingly used over time. Compared with CRLR, the LRCR approach was associated with better overall survival, lower postoperative mortality and fewer readmissions after colon/rectal resection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41634525What 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.