Analysis of the Prognostic Effectiveness of a Multivisceral Resection for Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer

Sejin Park; Yun Sik Lee

doi:10.3393/jksc.2011.27.1.21

Articles

Page Path: HOME > J Korean Soc Coloproctol > Volume 27(1); 2011 > Article

Original Article Analysis of the Prognostic Effectiveness of a Multivisceral Resection for Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Sejin Park, Yun Sik Lee; Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology 2011;27(1):21-26.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2011.27.1.21
Published online: February 28, 2011

Department of Surgery, Wallace Memorial Baptist Hospital, Busan, Korea.

Correspondence to: Yun Sik Lee. Department of Surgery, Wallace Memorial Baptist Hospital, Namsan-dong, Geumjeong-gu, Busan 609-728, Korea. Tel: +82-51-580-1288, Fax: +82-51-580-1292, ysleewmbh@hanmail.net

• Received: August 31, 2010 • Accepted: December 16, 2010

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

prev next

3,496 Views
28 Download
23 Crossref
28 Scopus

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
INTRODUCTION
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
ARTICLE INFORMATION
REFERENCES

Abstract

Purpose
The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic effectiveness of multivisceral resections of organs involved by locally advanced colorectal cancer.
Methods
A retrospective study was performed to analyze the data collected for 266 patients who underwent a curative resection for pT3-pT4 colorectal cancer without distant metastasis from January 2000 to December 2007. Of these 266 patients, 54 patients had macroscopically direct invasion of adjacent organs and underwent a multivisceral resection. We evaluated the short-term and the long-term outcomes of a multiviceral resection relative to that of standard surgery.
Results
The most common location for the primary lesion was the rectum, followed by the right colon and the sigmoid colon. Among the combined resected organs, common organs were the small bowel, ovary, and bladder. In the multivisceral resection group, tumor infiltration was confirmed histologically in 44.4% of the cases while in the remaining patients, a peritumorous adhesion had mimicked tumor invasion. Postoperative complications occurred in 17.5% of the patients who underwent standard surgery vs. 35.2% of those who underwent a multivisceral resection (P < 0.0001). But the survival rate of patients after a multivisceral resection was similar to that of patients after standard surgery (5-year survival rates: 61% vs. 58%; P = 0.36).
Conclusion
For locally advanced colorectal cancer, multivisceral resection was associated with higher postoperative morbidity, but the long-term survival after a curative resection is similar to that after a standard resection. Thus, a multivisceral resection can be recommended for most patients of locally advanced colorectal cancer.
Keywords: Multivisceral resection; Locally advanced colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

According to the annual report of the Cancer Registry of the Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs of Korea published in December 2009 [1, 2], colorectal cancer accounts of 12.7% of all cancers, and the trend is for an approximately 6.4% annual increase [1]. Because the life style in Korea has become westernized, the incidence of colorectal cancer is on the rise. The national program for the early detection of colorectal cancer, which is one of 5 major cancers in Korea, recommends that the guaiac test be performed annually on both males and females older than 50 years, and if an abnormality is detected, that perform colonoscopy or a double-contrast barium enema study be perfomed.

However, colorectal cancer is a disease preferentially occurring in the population older than 60 years. In Korea, it is diagnosed as symptomatic and advanced stage cancer in many cases rather than as early cancer through the use of an early diagnosis program for colorectal cancer [2]. Thus, it is usually diagnosed as locally advanced colorectal cancer, and tumor infiltration or adhesion is detected during surgery. Consequently, an en-bloc resection, a radical resection including adjacent organs and structures, is required [3-14].

In locally advanced colorectal cancer, when a multivisceral enbloc resection is selected, postoperative morbidity and an increase in mortality should be considered. Particularly, for elderly patients, patients whose risk level for surgery is high, and patients requiring a technically difficult combination of resections involving organs such as intrapelvic organs, the pancreas, etc., the decision to use a multivisceral resection must be made carefully [3, 4]. In our study, the characteristics of patients who underwent a multivisceral resection for suspicious local infiltration to adjacent organs other than primary organs were examined, and the risks of a multivisceral resection and the difference in prognoses between a multivisceral resection and standard surgery were examined.

METHODS

From January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2007, a total of 356 colorectal cancer patients underwent surgery. Among pT3-pT4 stage patients, excluding patients with distant metastasis at the time of diagnosis, patients with recurrent or synchronous cancer, and patients who had undergone a palliative colostomy instead of a colon resection, 266 patients were examined retrospectively.

As preoperative diagnosis methods, colonoscopy, abdominal ultrasound, abdominal CT, etc. were applied, and all cases were operated on by a single surgeon using the open method. Clinicopathological findings were analyzed by using the hospital records, and follow-up information was obtainded from visits to outpatient clinics and telephone surveys.

The 266 patients were divided into a group of patients who did not have infiltration to adjacent organs and who underwent a standard resection (212 patients) and a group of patients who were suspected of having invasion to neighboring organs and who, thus, underwent a multivisceral resection (54 patients), and the age, gender, location of the primary lesion, tumor size, infiltration depth, stage, histological type and differentiation grade were analyzed. In addition, for cases in which tumor infiltration was suspected macroscopically, actual tumor infiltration was examined pathologically. In addition, the incidences of postoperative complications in the group that underwent a standard resection were analyzed and compared with those in the group that underwent a multivisceral resection, as were the 5-year survival rates. The stage of colorectal cancer was determined according to the classification of cancer disease stage of the 7th American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) [15]. Postoperative complications and mortality were examined in a limited way during the hospital stay at the time of surgery only.

For all statistical analyses, the SPSS ver. 12.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used. For the comparison of variables, the unpaired t-test and the χ²-test were used. Survival rates were calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method and the results were validated by using the log-rank test. A P-value less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

Gender and age distributions

The average age of the 266 patients was 63.8 ± 12.1 years, the mean age of the 212 patients who underwent a standard procedure was 63.7 ± 12.4 years, and the mean age of the 54 patients who underwent a multivisceral resection was 64.4 ± 11.9 years. The ratio of males to females was 1:0.97, the ratio for the group that underwent a standard resection being 1:0.98 and that for the group that underwent a multivisceral resection being 1:0.93. The gender ratios were not significantly different (Table 1).

Distribution of tumors and histopathological characteristics

As the site at which the primary tumor developed, the rectum was most prevalent, followed in order by the right large intestine, the sigmoid colon, the left large intestine, and the transverse colon. The average tumor size of the group that underwent a standard procedure was 5.6 ± 1.1 cm, and that of the group that underwent a multivisceral resection was 6.2 ± 1.3 cm.

Among the 54 patients of the group that underwent a multivisceral resection, in 28 pT3 (52%) cases, neighboring organ invasion was suspected macroscopically, so a multivisceral resection was performed. However, postoperative pathohistological findings showed only inflammatory adhesion to adjacent tissues without the penetration of cancer cells to the large intestine serosa; 26 pT4 (48%) cases did show actual cancer cell invasion.

Based on the AJCC disease classification, stage IIA disease was detected in 16 (29.6%) of the cases that underwent a multivisceral resection, stage IIB disease in 3 cases (5.6%), stage IIC disease in 10 cases (18.5%), stage IIIB disease in 7 cases (13%), and stage IIIC disease in 18 cases (33.3%). Stage IIIC disease was the most prevalent.

Regarding the histological morphology and differentiation of cells, an adenocarcinoma was found in 49 cases (90.7%), a mucinous carcinoma in 4 cases (7.4%), and a signet ring cell carcinoma in 1 case (1.9%). An adenocarcinoma was the most prevalent. Among adenocarcinomas, a moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma was found in 30 cases (55.5%), and it was the most prevalent.

Multivisceral resection

In the 54 patients who underwent a multivisceral resection, in regard to the organs removed, the small intestine was removed in 13 cases (24%), which was the most prevalent, followed in order by the ovary and the bladder (Table 2). In cases showing actual cancer infiltration, the small intestine was most frequently resected in combination. In 45 cases, a multivisceral resection including one organ other than the primary lesion was performed, and in 11 cases, a multivisceral resection including more than two organs other than the primary lesion was performed.

Postoperative complications

In cases that underwent a standard procedure, postoperative complications developed in 37 patients (17.5%), 40 events, and in cases that underwent a multivisceral resection, they developed in 19 patients (35.2%), 21 events (Table 3). When the complications were divided into infectious complications and non-infectious complications, a trend was that both infectious and non-infectious complications occurred approximately 2 times more frequently in the patient group that had undergone a multivisceral resection, and the difference was statistically significant (17.5% vs. 35.2%, P < 0.001). Two postoperative deaths occurred in each group. In the group that underwent a standard procedure, one patient died of postoperative pneumonia and the other died of the leakage at the anastomosis site. In the group that underwent a multivisceral resection, one patient died of respiratory failure due to severe pleural effusion caused by renal failure and the other died of sepsis caused by a peritoneal abscess that developed due to the rupture of the tumors during surgery.

Prognosis and survival rate

In the group that underwent a standard procedure, the 5-year survival rate of stage II patients was 68%, and that of stage III patients was 56%. In the group that underwent a multivisceral resection, the 5-year survival rate of stage II patients was 64%, and that of stage III patients was 52%. In both groups, as the disease stage advanced, survival rates decreased (Table 4). In addition, the 5-year survival rate of the group that underwent a standard procedure was 61%, and that of the group that underwent a multivisceral resection was 58%, but the difference in survival rates was statistically not significant. In the group that underwent a multivisceral resection, the 5-year survival rate for patients who developed adhesion caused by simple inflammatory reactions was 62%, and the 5-year survival rate of patients with adhesion caused by actual tumor infiltration was 54%, but no statistically significant difference was shown (Table 5).

DISCUSSION

A multivisceral resection is defined as a surgical method resecting organs or structures adhering to the primary cancer en-bloc [4]. It has been reported that in colorectal cancer patients, cases in which local tumor invasion to adjacent organs or structures is suspected and in which a multivisceral resection is, thus, performed account for 7-16% of all cases [4, 6, 7, 16]. In our cases, similarly, the ratio of patients undergoing a multivisceral resection was 54 of the 356 patients (15.2%) who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer, which is comparable to the ratios reported by other studies.

Whether the adhesion to adjacent organs was caused by direct invasion by the tumor or as a result of a simple inflammatory reaction could not be determined by using macroscopic examination only, but it could be determined based on pathohistological findings after surgery. Among cases with adhesion of tumors to adjacent organs, 50-85% have been reported to be caused by actual cancer cell infiltration [4, 8-10, 12, 16]. In our cases, 26 of 54 patients (48%) had adhesion due to direct tumor infiltration, and the remaining 28 (52%) had adhesion was caused by a simple inflammatory reaction. Thus, many studies have reported that in cases when operative findings show suspected tumor infiltration, a radical resection, an en-bloc resection including adjacent organs and structures, achieved a good treatment outcome [3-14].

When invasion of tumors to adjacent organs is suspected, the separation of the adhered organs from the tumors has been reported to induce dissemination of tumor cells, thus elevating the local recurrence rate. When tumors rupture during surgery performed to separating the tumors from adjacent organs, the 5-year survival rate is merely 17%, but that of the en-bloc resection group is 49%, so a noticeably poorer treatment outcome was achieved in the former [4, 9].

Izbicki et al. [13] reported studies conducted on 220 T3 and T4 colorectal cancer patients thought to have local tumor infiltration; a multivisceral resection was performed in 83 cases. Among those 83 cases, in 38 cases, tumor infiltration was suspected macroscopically; however, after final pathologic tests, inflammatory adhesion, not cancer invasion, was found. They stated that the median survival times of the group that underwent a standard procedure and the group that underwent a multivisceral resection were 45 months and 44 months, respectively, and that no differences in postoperative morbidity or mortality of the two resection groups were detected. Hence, for cases in which tumor infiltration is suspected, an aggressive multivisceral resection is required. In our cases, if high-risk surgery to perform an en-bloc resection or a highly technically difficult operation, for example, cases with adhesion to the pancreas or intrapelvic organs was not performed, an aggressive multivisceral resection was performed.

Lehnert et al. [4] analyzed 201 patients that underwent a multivisceral resection because of invasion of tumors to adjacent organs. The location of the primary tumor was the sigmoid colon in 65 cases (32%), the rectum in 62 cases (31%), and the right large intestine in 34 cases (18%). In our cases, the rectum was the site in 57.4% of the cases, the right large intestine in 22.2%, and the sigmoid colon in 11.1%. The most prevalent organ was different from our study, but this is thought to be due to the fact that in upper rectal cancer cases, it is difficult to distinguish the organs from the sigmoid colon. However, the three organs where tumors developed most frequently were identical. Thus, for tumors that develop in the rectum, the incidence of invasion of malignant tumors to organs adjacent to the tumors has been shown to be high for tumors that develop in the right intestine and the sigmoid colon. Concerning adjacent organs to which tumors frequently adhere, Lehnert et al. [4] reported that in colorectal cancer cases, the organs were the large intestine and the bladder, and that in rectal cancer cases, they were, in order, the small intestine, the uterus, and the bladder. Gebhardt et al. [11] reported that the organs resected in combination were, in order, the small intestine, the bladder, and the female reproductive system. In our cases, the order was also the small intestine, the bladder, and the female reproductive system.

In the decision to use a multivisceral resection including adjacent organs, a fact that should be considered first is the increased morbidity and mortality after surgery. The incidence of complications after a multivisceral resection is reported to be from 11% to 44%, with an average of approximately 31% [4, 11-13, 17-19]. In regard to mortality, Gebhardt et al. [11] reported mortality in more than 3.6% of 173 patients. Cho et al. [3] reported that, among 36 patients, 1 patient died. In our cases, among 54 patients who underwent a multivisceral resection, 1 patient died. Among the 212 patients that underwent a standard procedure, 2 patients died.

Gebhardt et al. [11] reported that in colorectal cancer patients who underwent a multivisceral resection, the incidence of postoperative complications was 11.4%, and that of mortality was 3.6%, which were comparable to the rates of postoperative complications and mortality for our patient group that underwent a standard procedure (11.5% and 3.4%). Nakafusa et al. [19] investigated 323 pT3-pT4 colorectal cancer patients. A multivisceral resection was performed in 53 cases (16.4%), and among them, cancer infiltration was detected in 28 cases (52.8%). The incidences of postoperative complications in the group that underwent a standard procedure and the group that underwent a multivisceral resection were 17.8% and 49.1%, respectively, and the incidences of infectious complications (11.1% vs. 32.1%) and the incidences of noninfectious complications (8.9% vs. 20.8%) were higher in the group that underwent a multivisceral resection. Lepape et al. [14] reported that in 41 colorectal cancer patients who underwent a multivisceral resection, the incidences of postoperative complications and mortality weres 30.9% and 12.5%, respectively. In our study, in cases that underwent a multivisceral resection, 19 developed postoperative complications (35.2%), and 2 died (3.7%), results comparable to other studies.

Gebhardt et al. [11] reported that the effectiveness of a multivisceral resection is reflected in the survival rate. In the group that underwent a standard procedure and the group that underwent a multivisceral resection, the 5-year survival rates were examined for each stage, and the observed 5-year survival rates were as follows: stage II, 60% vs. 58%; stage III, 41% vs. 43%. Thus, for the same stage, no significant differences between the two surgery groups were shown. In addition, in the multivisceral resection group, the 5-year survival rates of pT3 patients with adhesion due to a simple inflammatory reaction and of pT4 patients with adhesion due to actual cancer infiltration weres 64% and 44%, respectively, which was comparable to our study. In the results reported by Lehnert et al. [4] the 5-year survival rates of stage II patients in the group that underwent a standard procedure and in the group that underwent a multivisceral resection were 66% and 63%, respectively, and those of stage III patients were 45% and 38%. In a recent study conducted on a large number of patients, the 5-year survival rate after a multivisceral resection was been reported to be approximately 51% [4, 10, 11], which is similar to the result in our study. However, in the study reported by Nakafusa et al. [19], the 5-year survival rates of the group that underwent a standard procedure and of the group that underwent a multivisceral resection were 79.5% and 76.6%, respectively, which are different from our study. This is thought to be due to the difference in the selection of patients, which excluded emergency surgery patients, the difference of stage at the time of surgery, etc.

In several studies, the effectiveness of a multivisceral resection has also been reported to be reflected in the rate of local recurrence and the disease-free survival rate. Croner et al. [20] reported that in 174 multivisceral resection patients, en-bloc resection of cancer could be performed in 162 patients (93.1%), that the local recurrence rate after surgery was 6.5%, and that the presence or absence of lymph node metastasis and the dissemination of cancer cells during surgery were major factors exerting effects. Nakafusa et al. [19] reported that the 5-year disease-free survival rate after surgery for the group that underwent a standard procedure (72.9%) was not greatly different from that of the group that underwent a multivisceral resection (66.8%). When prognostic factors were analyzed by using a multivariate analysis, tumor size, level of infiltration, volume of blood loss during surgery, operation time, and whether or not transfusion had been performed were found to be major prognostic factors. In our study, the number of subjects was small, and the follow-up observation period was short, so it was difficult to perform the follow-up observation. Thus, a multivariate analysis for the local recurrence rate and the disease-free survival rate could not be performed. However, in locally advanced colorectal cancer cases, 48% involved actual cancer infiltration, complications, although mild in most cases, were increased after a multivisceral resection, and the 5-year survival rate was not significantly different from that for a standard procedure. Thus, good outcomes may be obtained by performing a multivisceral resection aggressively.

For the treatment of locally advanced colorectal cancer that has invaded adjacent organs, radical surgery using a multivisceral resection has the disadvantage of increased postoperative complications, but the 5-year survival rate is comparable to that for the standard procedure. Therefore, except for patients with high risk, an aggressive multivisceral resection may increase the possibility of long-term survival after surgery.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

No potential conflict of interest relvant to this article was reported.

REFERENCES

1. Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affarirs. Annual report of cancer incidence (2007), cancer prevalence (2007), and survival (1993-2007) in Korea. 2009.Seoul: Ministry for Health, Welfare and Family Affairs.
2. Lee CR, Kim YW, Kim NK, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY, et al. The influence of age on survival and recurrence after a curative surgical resection for colon cancer patients. J Korean Soc Coloproctol 2009;25:401–409.Article
3. Cho SW, Lee RA, Chung SS, Kim KH. Concomitant adjacent organ resection in locally advanced colon cancer. J Korean Soc Coloproctol 2009;25:94–99.Article
4. Lehnert T, Methner M, Pollok A, Schaible A, Hinz U, Herfarth C. Multivisceral resection for locally advanced primary colon and rectal cancer: an analysis of prognostic factors in 201 patients. Ann Surg 2002;235:217–225. PMID: 11807361.Article PubMed PMC
5. Nelson H, Petrelli N, Carlin A, Couture J, Fleshman J, Guillem J, et al. Guidelines 2000 for colon and rectal cancer surgery. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:583–596. PMID: 11309435.Article PubMed
6. Staniunas RJ, Schoetz DJ Jr. Extended resection for carcinoma of colon and rectum. Surg Clin North Am 1993;73:117–129. PMID: 8426992.Article PubMed
7. Sugarbaker PH, Corlew S. Influence of surgical techniques on survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1982;25:545–557. PMID: 6749455.Article PubMed
8. Eisenberg SB, Kraybill WG, Lopez MJ. Long-term results of surgical resection of locally advanced colorectal carcinoma. Surgery 1990;108:779–785. PMID: 2218891.PubMed
9. Gall FP, Tonak J, Altendorf A. Multivisceral resections in colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1987;30:337–341. PMID: 3568922.Article PubMed
10. Heslov SF, Frost DB. Extended resection for primary colorectal carcinoma involving adjacent organs or structures. Cancer 1988;62:1637–1640. PMID: 3167778.Article PubMed
11. Gebhardt C, Meyer W, Ruckriegel S, Meier U. Multivisceral resection of advanced colorectal carcinoma. Langenbecks Arch Surg 1999;384:194–199. PMID: 10328174.Article PubMed
12. Sokmen S, Terzi C, Unek T, Alanyali H, Fuzun M. Multivisceral resections for primary advanced rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 1999;14:282–285. PMID: 10663895.Article PubMed
13. Izbicki JR, Hosch SB, Knoefel WT, Passlick B, Bloechle C, Broelsch CE. Extended resections are beneficial for patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:1251–1256. PMID: 7497835.Article PubMed
14. Lepape A. Prevention of nosocomial infections in ICU. What is really effective? Med Arh 2003;57(4 Suppl 1): 15–18. PMID: 15017857.
15. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A. editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. 2009.7th ed. New York: Springer.
16. Kruschewski M, Pohlen U, Hotz HG, Ritz JP, Kroesen AJ, Buhr HJ. Results of multivisceral resection of primary colorectal cancer. Zentralbl Chir 2006;131:217–222. PMID: 16739062.Article PubMed PDF
17. Luna-Perez P, Rodriguez-Ramirez SE, De la Barrera MG, Zeferino M, Labastida S. Multivisceral resection for colon cancer. J Surg Oncol 2002;80:100–104. PMID: 12173378.Article PubMed
18. Eisenberg SB, Kraybill WG, Lopez MJ. Long-term results of surgical resection of locally advanced colorectal carcinoma. Surgery 1990;108:779–785. PMID: 2218891.PubMed
19. Nakafusa Y, Tanaka T, Tanaka M, Kitajima Y, Sato S, Miyazaki K. Comparison of multivisceral resection and standard operation for locally advanced colorectal cancer: analysis of prognostic factors for short-term and long-term outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 2004;47:2055–2063. PMID: 15657654.Article PubMed
20. Croner RS, Merkel S, Papadopoulos T, Schellerer V, Hohenberger W, Goehl J. Multivisceral resection for colon carcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 2009;52:1381–1386. PMID: 19617748.Article PubMed

Table 1

Clinicopathologic factors and multivisceral resection

Values are presented as mean ± SD or number (%).

Table 2

Organs of combined resection and pathologic cancer invasion

Values are presented as number (%).

^aSome patients had more than one combined resection.

Table 3

Postoperative complications and operative death

Values are presented as number (%).

^aSome patients had more than one combined resection.

Table 4

Stage-dependent 5-year survival in patients undergoing standard and multiviceral resection

Table 5

Overall survival after multiviceral resection

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Factors associated with one-year mortality after curative surgery for primary clinical T4 and locally recurrent rectal cancer in elderly patients
Nikki C.M. van Ham, Sofie Glazemakers, Mirjam van der Ende-van Loon, Grard A.P. Nieuwenhuijzen, Harm J.T. Rutten, Jip L. Tolenaar, Anne Jacobs, Jacobus W.A. Burger, Stijn H.J. Ketelaers, Johanne G. Bloemen
European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2024; 50(6): 108259. CrossRef
A Novel Clinical Nomogram for Predicting Overall Survival in Patients with Emergency Surgery for Colorectal Cancer
Georgiana Bianca Constantin, Dorel Firescu, Raul Mihailov, Iulian Constantin, Ioana Anca Ștefanopol, Daniel Andrei Iordan, Bogdan Ioan Ștefănescu, Rodica Bîrlă, Eugenia Panaitescu
Journal of Personalized Medicine.2023; 13(4): 575. CrossRef
Multivisceral resection of advanced colon and rectal cancer: a prospective multicenter observational study with propensity score analysis of the morbidity, mortality, and survival
Michael Arndt, Hans Lippert, Roland S. Croner, Frank Meyer, Ronny Otto, Karsten Ridwelski
Innovative Surgical Sciences.2023; 8(2): 61. CrossRef
Extended Total Mesorectal Excision (e-TME) for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Narendra Pandit, Kunal Bikram Deo, Sujan Gautam, Tek Narayan Yadav, Awaj Kafle, Sudhir Kumar Singh, Laligen Awale
Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer.2022; 53(2): 253. CrossRef
Predictors of undergoing multivisceral resection, margin status and survival in Dutch patients with locally advanced colorectal cancer
L.C.F. de Nes, J.A.G. van der Heijden, M.G. Verstegen, L. Drager, P.J. Tanis, R.H.A. Verhoeven, J.H.W. de Wilt
European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2022; 48(5): 1144. CrossRef
Subclassification of Multivisceral Resections for T4b Colon Cancer with Relevance for Postoperative Complications and Oncological Risks
Karin A.T.G.M. Wasmann, Charlotte E.L. Klaver, Jarmila D.W. van der Bilt, Iris D. Nagtegaal, Albert M. Wolthuis, Hjalmar C. van Santvoort, Bert Ramshorst, André D’Hoore, Johannes H.W. de Wilt, Pieter J. Tanis
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2020; 24(9): 2113. CrossRef
Outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical resection for T4 colorectal cancer
Chun-Ming Huang, Ching-Wen Huang, Cheng-Jen Ma, Hsiang-Lin Tsai, Wei-Chih Su, Tsung-Kun Chang, Ming-Yii Huang, Jaw Yuan Wang
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.2020; 12(12): 1428. CrossRef
Hospital volume and outcome in rectal cancer patients; results of a population-based study in the Netherlands
J.A.W. Hagemans, W.J. Alberda, M. Verstegen, J.H.W. de Wilt, C. Verhoef, M.A. Elferink, J.W.A. Burger
European Journal of Surgical Oncology.2019; 45(4): 613. CrossRef
Significance of multivisceral resections in oncologic surgery: A systematic review of the literature
Giorgi Nadiradze, Can Yurttas, Alfred Königsrainer, Philipp Horvath
World Journal of Meta-Analysis.2019; 7(6): 269. CrossRef
É o carcinoma colônico localmente avançado não metastático uma variante biológica distinta? Estudo baseado na avaliação histológica, painel imuno-histoquímico e sobrevida.
René Aloisio da Costa Vieira, Ademar Lopes, Fernando Augusto Soares, Renata Almeida Coudry, Wilson Toshio Nakagawa, Maria do Rosário Dias de Oliveira Latore
Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
The short-term outcomes of laparoscopic multivisceral resection for locally advanced colorectal cancer: our experience of 39 cases
Yuichiro Miyake, Junichi Nishimura, Hidekazu Takahashi, Naotsugu Haraguchi, Taishi Hata, Ichiro Takemasa, Tsunekazu Mizushima, Hirofumi Yamamoto, Yuichiro Doki, Masaki Mori
Surgery Today.2017; 47(5): 575. CrossRef
Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic multivisceral resection for surgical T4b colon cancers: Retrospective analyses
Ryo Takahashi, Suguru Hasegawa, Kenjiro Hirai, Shigeo Hisamori, Koya Hida, Kenji Kawada, Yoshiharu Sakai
Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery.2017; 10(2): 154. CrossRef
The Feasibility of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic and Laparoscopic Multivisceral Resection Compared With Open Surgery for Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer
Guang-tan Zhang, Xue-dong Zhang
Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques.2017; 27(4): e57. CrossRef
Prognostic factors affecting outcomes in multivisceral en bloc resection for colorectal cancer
Caio Sergio Rizkallah Nahas, Sergio Carlos Nahas, Ulysses Ribeiro-Junior, Leonardo Bustamante-Lopez, Carlos Frederico Sparapan Marques, Rodrigo Ambar Pinto, Antonio Rocco Imperiale, Guilherme Cutait Cotti, William Carlos Nahas, Daher Cezar Chade, Dariane
Clinics.2017; 72(5): 258. CrossRef
Outcomes of preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery in patients with unresectable locally advanced sigmoid colon cancer
Bo Qiu, Pei-Rong Ding, Ling Cai, Wei-Wei Xiao, Zhi-Fan Zeng, Gong Chen, Zhen-Hai Lu, Li-Ren Li, Xiao-Jun Wu, Rene-Olivier Mirimanoff, Zhi-Zhong Pan, Rui-Hua Xu, Yuan-Hong Gao
Chinese Journal of Cancer.2016;[Epub] CrossRef
Smaller tumor size is associated with poor survival in T4b colon cancer
Ben Huang, Yang Feng, Shao-Bo Mo, San-Jun Cai, Li-Yong Huang
World Journal of Gastroenterology.2016; 22(29): 6726. CrossRef
Neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and multivisceral resection to optimize R0 resection of locally recurrent adherent colon cancer
J. Hallet, F.S. Zih, M. Lemke, L. Milot, A.J. Smith, C.S. Wong
European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO).2014; 40(6): 706. CrossRef
Accuracy of Preoperative Urinary Symptoms, Urinalysis, Computed Tomography and Cystoscopic Findings for the Diagnosis of Urinary Bladder Invasion in Patients with Colorectal Cancer
Varat Woranisarakul, Patkawat Ramart, Kittipong Phinthusophon, Ekkarin Chotikawanich, Siriluck Prapasrivorakul, Varut Lohsiriwat
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention.2014; 15(17): 7241. CrossRef
Multivisceral Resection in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review
H. M. Mohan, M. D. Evans, J. O. Larkin, J. Beynon, D. C. Winter
Annals of Surgical Oncology.2013; 20(9): 2929. CrossRef
Laparoscopic Versus Open Multivisceral Resection for Primary Colorectal Cancer: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes
Yasutomo Nagasue, Takashi Akiyoshi, Masashi Ueno, Yosuke Fukunaga, Satoshi Nagayama, Yoshiya Fujimoto, Tsuyoshi Konishi, Toshiya Nagasaki, Jun Nagata, Toshiki Mukai, Atsushi Ikeda, Riki Ono, Toshiharu Yamaguchi
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.2013; 17(7): 1299. CrossRef
En bloc Right Hemicolectomy/Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Cancer: One Institution's Experience
Maria C. Mora-Pinzon, Amanda B. Francescatti, Minh B. Luu, Keith W. Millikan, Daniel J. Deziel, Dana M. Hayden, Theodore John Saclarides
The American Surgeon™.2013; 79(6): 238. CrossRef
Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and multivisceral resection for primary locally advanced adherent colon cancer: A single institution experience
M. Cukier, A.J. Smith, L. Milot, W. Chu, H. Chung, D. Fenech, S. Herschorn, Y. Ko, C. Rowsell, H. Soliman, Y.C. Ung, C.S. Wong
European Journal of Surgical Oncology (EJSO).2012; 38(8): 677. CrossRef
A rectumtumorok sebészete
Péter Metzger
Magyar Sebészet.2012; 65(3): 129. CrossRef

PubReader

Cite this Article

Cite this Article: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format: