Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Surg ; 61: 42-47, 2019 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30537548

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Previous studies comparing the survival outcomes of liver resections with and without preoperative portal vein embolization (PVE) for colorectal liver metastases (CLM) have linked PVE to higher rate of tumor progression, lower overall survival (OS) and lower disease-free survival (DFS). The lack of adjusted models to compare these outcomes is a limitation of these studies since patients requiring PVE may differ significantly from the ones receiving upfront surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 128 patients undergoing CLM resection. The OS analysis followed an intent-to-treat (ITT) approach. The adjusted impact of PVE on OS and DFS was evaluated using multivariate Cox regression models. RESULTS: Seventy-one patients underwent PVE before attempting a liver resection while 57 received upfront surgery (NoPVE). All NoPVE patients were resected while 14 PVE participants (19.7%) were not operated (tumor progression = 9/14). PVE patients had a significantly higher preoperative lesions count (3 [1.75-4] vs 1 [1-2.5]; p < 0.001), a higher prevalence of bilateral metastases (23.5% vs 8.8, p = 0.028) and a higher count of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy cycles compared to NoPVE patients. The OS of PVE patients was similar to NoPVE participants (44.7 months [26.9-69.5] vs 49.0 [24.9-64.8], p = 0.761). The DFS of resected PVE patients was higher than NoPVE patients (33.2 months [10.7-54.6] vs 23.4 months [14.1-58.1], p = 0.991). In the adjusted models, preoperative lesions count was the only significant predictor of overall mortality (HR+IC95 = 1.06 (1.02-1.11) p = 0.005) and cancer recurrence (HR+IC95 = 1.14 (1.03-1.27) p = 0.012). CONCLUSION: In the context of CLM, patients requiring PVE differ significantly from patients receiving upfront surgery. This confirms the need for adjusted models when comparing the clinical outcomes of both groups. Our adjusted analysis suggests that PVE is not a significant predictor of a lower OS or DFS. PVE allowed the resection of 80% of participants with initially unresectable CLM. INSTITUTIONAL PROTOCOL NUMBER: 12.106 STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03168230.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Embolização Terapêutica/métodos , Hepatectomia/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundário , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Estudos de Coortes , Neoplasias Colorretais/mortalidade , Neoplasias Colorretais/terapia , Embolização Terapêutica/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Hepatectomia/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Hepáticas/terapia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/epidemiologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/etiologia , Veia Porta/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Cuidados Pré-Operatórios/métodos , Estudos Prospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA