File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Advantage of anterior resection in major resection for colorectal liver metastases

TitleAdvantage of anterior resection in major resection for colorectal liver metastases
Authors
Issue Date2017
PublisherWiley. The Journal's web site is located at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1868-6982
Citation
Joint Congress of The 6th Biennial Congress of the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association & The 29th Meeting of Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Yokohama, Japan, 7–10 June 2017. In Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences, 2017, v. 24 n. S1, p. A150, abstract no. O–37–3 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Anterior approach (AA) was useful to prevent rupture and dissemination. The use of AA in colorectal liver metastases (CLM) was not certain. Methods: This is a retrospective study held in single centre using prospectively collected database for patients underwent CLM between January 00 –December 12. The perioperative details, pathological data and outcome were studied. The size of the tumors and mode of liver resections were matched. Results: During the captioned period, there were 40 patients with CLM who had undergone major liver resections and matched for comparison. 25 patients underwent conventional approach (CA), while 15 underwent AA. There were no difference in terms of age, sex, and comorbidities of the patients. Preoperatively liver function was similar, and carcinoembryonic antigen were 40 and 22 (ng/ml) respectively in CA and AA. There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss and operative time. The median size of tumor was 7cm; and number of tumor was the same. There was no hospital mortality; overall and major complications were similar. Both groups had similar follow up durations (40 months in CA vs 31.1 in AA, p=0.056). Result suggested that both groups had similar time and pattern to recurrence (13.8 months in CA vs 15.4 in AA, p=0. 92). The disease free survival was similar; the overall survival were also similar (80.7 months, 5 year–survival 64.2% in CA vs 47.1 months, 5 year–survival 36.3% in AA, p=0.106). Conclusion: There was no survival difference in using various approaches for major resection in large CLM. However, AA offered advantage in removing large tumor, as medial mobilization was allowed once the liver was opened up.
DescriptionOral Presentation: no. O-37-3
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/244001
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.146
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.446

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorShe, WH-
dc.contributor.authorChan, ACY-
dc.contributor.authorTsang, SHY-
dc.contributor.authorDai, WC-
dc.contributor.authorChok, KSH-
dc.contributor.authorNg, KKC-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, TT-
dc.contributor.authorLaw, WL-
dc.contributor.authorLo, CM-
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-25T03:02:21Z-
dc.date.available2017-08-25T03:02:21Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citationJoint Congress of The 6th Biennial Congress of the Asian-Pacific Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association & The 29th Meeting of Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, Yokohama, Japan, 7–10 June 2017. In Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences, 2017, v. 24 n. S1, p. A150, abstract no. O–37–3-
dc.identifier.issn1868-6974-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/244001-
dc.descriptionOral Presentation: no. O-37-3-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Anterior approach (AA) was useful to prevent rupture and dissemination. The use of AA in colorectal liver metastases (CLM) was not certain. Methods: This is a retrospective study held in single centre using prospectively collected database for patients underwent CLM between January 00 –December 12. The perioperative details, pathological data and outcome were studied. The size of the tumors and mode of liver resections were matched. Results: During the captioned period, there were 40 patients with CLM who had undergone major liver resections and matched for comparison. 25 patients underwent conventional approach (CA), while 15 underwent AA. There were no difference in terms of age, sex, and comorbidities of the patients. Preoperatively liver function was similar, and carcinoembryonic antigen were 40 and 22 (ng/ml) respectively in CA and AA. There was no difference in intraoperative blood loss and operative time. The median size of tumor was 7cm; and number of tumor was the same. There was no hospital mortality; overall and major complications were similar. Both groups had similar follow up durations (40 months in CA vs 31.1 in AA, p=0.056). Result suggested that both groups had similar time and pattern to recurrence (13.8 months in CA vs 15.4 in AA, p=0. 92). The disease free survival was similar; the overall survival were also similar (80.7 months, 5 year–survival 64.2% in CA vs 47.1 months, 5 year–survival 36.3% in AA, p=0.106). Conclusion: There was no survival difference in using various approaches for major resection in large CLM. However, AA offered advantage in removing large tumor, as medial mobilization was allowed once the liver was opened up.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherWiley. The Journal's web site is located at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1868-6982-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences-
dc.titleAdvantage of anterior resection in major resection for colorectal liver metastases-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailShe, WH: brianshe@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChan, ACY: acchan@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailDai, WC: daiwc@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChok, KSH: chok6275@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailNg, KKC: kkcng@HKUCC.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailCheung, TT: cheung68@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailLaw, WL: lawwl@hkucc.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailLo, CM: chungmlo@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityChan, ACY=rp00310-
dc.identifier.authorityChok, KSH=rp02110-
dc.identifier.authorityCheung, TT=rp02129-
dc.identifier.authorityLaw, WL=rp00436-
dc.identifier.authorityLo, CM=rp00412-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jhbp.477-
dc.identifier.hkuros274905-
dc.identifier.volume24-
dc.identifier.issueS1-
dc.identifier.spageA150, abstract no. O–37–3-
dc.identifier.epageA150, abstract no. O–37–3-
dc.publisher.placeJapan-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats