2001
DOI: 10.1016/s1072-7515(01)00970-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simultaneous Detection of Colorectal Carcinoma Liver and Lung Metastases Does Not Warrant Resection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
42
3
6

Year Published

2002
2002
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
42
3
6
Order By: Relevance
“…This could be understood when it might be considered that majority of the patients were metachronous liver and lung metastasis in this study since the spread of malignant cells through the two drainages at the same time, that is, simultaneous metastasis was considered an adverse prognostic factor. 20) Although there was no significant differences in the OS between the patients with metachronous liver and pulmonary metastases and those with synchronous metastases in our study (P = 0.23, Fig. 2), but this would probably be due to the small number of cases in the group of synchronous metastases.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%
“…This could be understood when it might be considered that majority of the patients were metachronous liver and lung metastasis in this study since the spread of malignant cells through the two drainages at the same time, that is, simultaneous metastasis was considered an adverse prognostic factor. 20) Although there was no significant differences in the OS between the patients with metachronous liver and pulmonary metastases and those with synchronous metastases in our study (P = 0.23, Fig. 2), but this would probably be due to the small number of cases in the group of synchronous metastases.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%
“…Resultados diferentes foram relatados por JAECK et al (22) , CADY et al (8) e AMBIRU et al (3) , que não consideraram o intervalo de tempo entre a ressecção do tumor primário e o surgimento da metástase hepática como fatores prognósticos independentes. Apesar dos resultados discordantes a respeito da importância desse fator, há consenso na literatura (3,12,23,26,28,29,36,39,41,45) de que o intervalo entre a ressecção do tumor primário e o surgimento da metástase no fígado não contra-indica a ressecção hepática.…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Embora a presença de doença tumoral extra-hepática reduza a sobrevida em 5 anos, a níveis não superiores a 20% (20) , a invasão direta por tumor a estruturas adjacentes, implantes localizados e metástases pulmonares não constitui contra-indicação para a ressecção hepática, desde que também possam ser ressecadas inteiramente e com margens livres (28,36) .…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Extrahepatic disease has traditionally been considered a contraindication to resection of hepatic colorectal cancer metastasis [9,14,15,45]. However, improvements in morbidity and mortality rates following hepatectomy, as well as the advent of more effective systemic chemotherapy agents, have prompted several investigators [95][96][97][98] to attempt surgery for some of these patients. Local extension to adjacent structures, intraluminal biliary tumor thrombus, and locoregional recurrence should not be considered true extrahepatic disease, and none of these should be considered a contraindication to surgery when an R0 resection is feasible.…”
Section: Extrahepatic Diseasementioning
confidence: 99%